I recently delivered a CPD talk for the Association for Learning Technology, in it I discussed approaches to programme-level design. I thought it would be good to put together some further ideas around what I discussed so people have something they can reference.
This is the first of two posts, in this post I cover some of the justification for an approach to programme design, in the second I’ll outline tools and techniques that can be used to explore a programme with stakeholders.
If you want to see my slides you can access them on the National Teaching Repository.
3 “P’s” in Programme Design
“Moving forward, we need a new approach to instructional design, a critical instructional design, not just in terms of what we value (flexible and adaptive, stochastic (variable) and dynamic, equitable and just) but also in how we work, the collaboration that faculty and instructional designers should be doing, together.” (Jessifer and Burges, 2022)
The approaches that I take when thinking about programme design are heavily influenced by a few key texts. Namely Toward a Critical Instructional Design, Teaching to Transgress, and Start with Why. In looking at this approach I hope to get towards a state of purposeful learning design, that is, learning design that is explicit and transparent about its motivations and intended impacts, learning design that is honest and transparent, learning design that is shared and has a sense of collective responsibility.
With this in mind I’d like to acknowledge three “P’s” that, for me, should underpin approaches to programme design.
Privilege
Before we can get to a state of shared understanding we need to acknowledge the role privilege plays in learning design. It is a privilege for you to be involved in the process, and it is a privilege for you to be in a position to shape something new, and exciting, in your discipline. What we need to understand is that we can extend this privilege to others. I’d like to start with a simple question.
“How many employees contribute to the student experience in your institution?”
If your answer isn’t “all of them” then you may need to re-evaluate the way you view your institution. Everybody has a part to play, be that directly, or indirectly.
I am reminded of this quote from “Teaching to Transgress”.
“Radical pedagogy must insist that everyone’s presence is acknowledged … there must be an ongoing recognition that everyone influences the classroom dynamic, that everyone contributes” – (hooks, 2014)
In practical terms this dictates who you involve in the design process or subsequent workshops, who you ask for advice, and how you set the tone for those discussions.
My advice is to acknowledge that it’s a privilege to be designing a programme, it’s an exciting opportunity. Be thankful for the opportunity and for the people that can help you achieve the design. Bring others into the fold early, this can help to avoid disasters later. In these cases it’s better to be proactive rather than reactive in your design process. Extend the privilege, it’s within your power, you may find that others are just as excited as you are to make your programme a reality.
Purpose
“WHY is a purpose, cause or belief” (Sinek, 2011)
“Why should I do this? I’ve not got time”
“What’s the point?”
“I’m not usually involved in this, it’s not my problem”
Once we’ve acknowledged that we can elevate people to a privileged position and involve them in the design process, we need to bring them into the process in a way that makes them feel valued for there expertise. My experience is that it doesn’t take much effort, and a lot of people are happy to participate and contribute where they can.
When asking for participation, be clear about where they can contribute, send them a personal invitation to participate, or ask them to recommend somebody to join in on the process. An example is below.
Dear “Academic Quality Expert”,
We are hosting a programme design event next month.
I’d really appreciate your insight into the quality processes that go behind the validation so that we can make sure that the credit weighting, OfS, and QAA requirements are met at the point of design. It would be great to have your early input so you can share your ideas with us and help shape this new programme.
Best wishes
The above email is simple and to the point, you may want to add more context (the proposed name for the programme could be included).
What we are doing with this approach is acknowledging that we need expertise and that we value the person’s expertise and support in designing the programme. You are also setting clear expectations for their input and giving them advance notice so they have time to prepare where needed.
I’d like to iterate how vital purpose and privilege are when inviting students into the process. See that you can cover expenses, or provide them with some form of recognition for being involved. Give them advance notice of participation and what to expect, acknowledge that you would be privileged if they attended.
Practice
We, sadly, must acknowledge that pedagogical practice is often not at the forefront of many colleagues minds. This isn’t out of spite or lack of care but lies in institutional structures and vast competing priorities. Stommel (Jessifer) and Burges (2022) state the following in “Towards a Critical Instructional Design”.
“Sadly, institutional structures are not designed to cultivate (and sometimes undermine) pedagogical expertise in both instructional designers and faculty. We are excellent at valuing other kinds of expertise, “disciplinary” expertise in particular, but the majority of higher education faculty have little preparation for the work of teaching.”
This often manifests in learning and teaching centres only being able to issue advisory comments that can be ignored easily. It’s why we often see people in learning and teaching centres sidelined when, in fact, they may be the expert needed to improve the experience of students. This is why our Purpose and Privilege must be exposed from the start, we need to work in clear partnership with those who can help us. Our practice must be rooted in a clear and honest dialogue, and open collaboration.
To put this into context, it’s always useful to make a plan. Don’t just plan for what you have to do to make the programme work, acknowledge that there are those that can support you with your practice, indeed, there are usually people specifically employed to support you in these processes, either as a critical friend or as a pedagogical expert. Giving these people purpose and suspending privilege to allow them in to help can be difficult, but their expertise can help to define enhanced practice for your programme.
Summary
This short blog post calls for a programme design approach that is rooted in Privilege, Purpose and Practice. We must create purposeful spaces where we suspend privilege and explore practice in an open and honest way, only then can we create transformative programmes of study for students (and staff).
In the next post I’ll take a look at how we can create spaces for workshops that live and breathe this ethos and how we can use critical approaches to create collective action around a programme design. I’ll explore how to do this in the constraints of institutional frameworks and validation processes.
References
Burges, M. and Jessifer (2022). Toward a Critical Instructional Design. Hybrid Pedagogy Inc.
hooks, b. (2014). Teaching to transgress. Routledge.
Rossi, V. (2023). Inclusive Learning Design in Higher Education: A practical guide to creating equitable learning experiences. Routledge.
Salmon, G. (2025). Carpe Diem – A team based approach to learning design. Available from https://www.gillysalmon.com/carpe-diem.html
Sinek, S. (2011). Start with why. Penguin
John Brindle 
Leave a comment