How Constructivism Learning Theory Shapes Modern Instructional Design And L&D Strategy — from elearningindustry.com by Christopher Pappas
.

Also see:
- Microlearning Trends And Strategies In 2026 — from elearningindustry.com by Christopher Pappas
How Constructivism Learning Theory Shapes Modern Instructional Design And L&D Strategy — from elearningindustry.com by Christopher Pappas
.

Also see:
From DSC:
Could this be a part of our future learning ecosystems? Education as a personalized content feed.
Coursera wants users to learn through shorter, faster content — from digitaltrends.com by Moinak Pal
Coursera wants online learning to feel more like TikTok
.
Online learning platform Coursera is taking a page straight out of TikTok’s playbook. The company has launched a new AI-powered feed designed to serve short-form educational content in a scrollable, personalized format, signaling a major shift in how digital learning platforms may try to keep users engaged.
The feature introduces bite-sized video lessons, clips, and explainers curated through artificial intelligence based on a user’s interests, learning habits, career goals, and previous course activity. Instead of committing to hour-long lectures or full certification programs upfront, users can now discover short educational snippets designed to make learning feel more casual, accessible, and addictive.
Users scroll through a feed of short educational videos and AI-curated learning moments covering topics ranging from coding and business to AI, productivity, data science, and personal development.
GenAI practice blossoms through the open exchange of insights — from timeshighereducation.com by Samuel Doherty, who is the education and innovation coordinator at the University of Newcastle in Australia
How a structured GenAI professional development series, built around practice, peer voices and multiple entry points, fosters open exchange among colleagues, universities and industry
Connect internal practice to sector-wide thinking
Whatever is happening within any single institution is only part of the picture. Effective GenAI practice grows through open exchange of insights among colleagues, universities, professional bodies and industry, and a development programme that is entirely inward-looking risks missing both useful knowledge and important shifts in expectation.
Our AI sector voices sessions aim to bring external contributors into the programme: researchers, practitioners and sector representatives working at the intersection of GenAI and higher education. The aim is to situate institutional practice within the wider conversation and to signal to staff that the institution is genuinely engaged with that conversation, not just managing it internally.
In the Australian context, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (Teqsa) people pillar positions staff as drivers, enablers, users and innovators of GenAI practice, and identifies a lack of information or understanding as one of the primary barriers to ethical and effective engagement. That framing is useful regardless of regulatory context: institutions that treat their people as active participants in shaping practice, rather than recipients of policy, are likely to develop more durable capability.
Regular, lightweight communications, a weekly community of practice update and a monthly all-staff digest can maintain momentum between sessions without adding significantly to anyone’s workload.
Why universities must become flexible lifelong partners, not one-time providers — from timeshighereducation.com by Sankar Sivarajah
As careers become increasingly non-linear and shaped by rapid change, universities must evolve beyond traditional degree provision, says Sankar Sivarajah. Here, he outlines strategies
From programmes to learning ecosystems
These pressures point towards a broader redefinition of higher education. Rather than viewing education as a one-time experience culminating in a degree, universities increasingly need to see themselves as partners in professional development across an entire career.
This means moving from a model centred on programmes to one focused on learning ecosystems that allow individuals to enter, leave and re-engage with higher education as their needs evolve.
Business schools may be particularly well placed to lead this shift because of their close engagement with employers and their long tradition of educating professionals at different stages of their careers.
But success will depend on more than introducing new modules or certificates. Universities must confront a fundamental question. Are the systems, structures and cultures that define higher education capable of supporting genuinely flexible learning?
The sector has already embraced the language of lifelong learning – the next step is ensuring that universities themselves are built to deliver it.
From DSC:
Long-time readers of this blog have seen this graphic of mine posted over the last 12+ years:
.

.
Also relevant/see:
What if the undergraduate journey were a four-year internship? — from timeshighereducation.com by Michelle Seref
Treating work placements and co-curricular programmes as optional or supplementary misses deeper questions about whether traditional degrees prepare students for careers. Michelle Seref explains
Attending workshops or polishing a résumé in their final semester does not make students career-ready. They need to practise how to work – how to collaborate, navigate ambiguity, manage projects and apply knowledge in context – throughout their academic experience. The reality is that career readiness is not a co-curricular programme; it is an essential part of an integrated curriculum.
To be clear, employers do not expect classrooms to become training centres. What they are asking for – implicitly and explicitly – is graduates who can function in complex environments from day one. That means graduates who can work in teams, communicate professionally with stakeholders, adapt when plans change, apply theory to real constraints and learn continuously on the job.
These capabilities do not develop through passive learning. But experiential learning is often misunderstood as a single, high-impact activity: an internship, a capstone project or study abroad. In reality, its power comes from repetition and progression. One experience introduces exposure. A sequence of experiences builds competence.
We are proposing a paradigm shift: repositioning the undergraduate journey as a four-year professional internship rather than a continuation of the K-12 classroom environment.
.
From DSC:
The problem with this innovative idea is that faculty often are not out in the “real world.” The best chance higher ed has to deliver on this idea is via the adjunct faculty members out there. Often, they are the ones practicing what they are teaching. They are constantly pulse-checking — and actively involved with — their industries and have more up-to-date, practical knowledge.
But this is a problem for traditional institutions of higher education, which have treated their adjunct faculty members poorly through the years. Adjunct faculty members hardly make minimum wage, have no benefits, no retirement plans, etc. — plus they have little to no say in faculty senates.
Organizational change would be a requirement.
Deans for Impact Releases New Edition of The Science of Learning — from deansforimpact.org
Second edition of seminal report reflects new research amidst growing momentum for evidence-based instruction in teacher preparation and PK-12.
AUSTIN, Texas (May 19, 2026) – Deans for Impact (DFI) today released the second edition of The Science of Learning, a report translating cognitive-science research into practical implications for teaching. The updated edition includes new research on memory, attention, motivation, and learning misconceptions, offering educators a research-based foundation for understanding how to support durable student learning.
First released in 2015, The Science of Learning is DFI’s most widely-used and cited resource, with more than one million downloads. Since its publication, DFI has supported nearly 300 teacher-preparation programs to make instructional quality a priority in the way teachers are prepared, directly impacting more than 110,000 teachers over the last decade.
The second edition arrives at a moment when more than 40 states have made meaningful investments in strengthening evidence-based instruction, particularly in early literacy, mathematics, and the use of high-quality instructional materials. The science of learning supports future teachers to build a comprehensive foundation for instructional decision-making that cuts across content areas and grade levels.
…
The report has been endorsed by more than 100 field experts and leading organizations across the United States and internationally.
Download the report at deansforimpact.org/thescienceoflearning.
An example excerpt:
Want Students to Build a Healthier Relationship With Technology? Start With The Arts — from techlearning.com by Adrianna Marshall
Arts classrooms demonstrate what technology integration at its best can look like
But at a moment defined by rapid AI adoption and ongoing debates about screen time, the argument for protecting and investing in arts education needs to take on a new tone. The arts continue to be one of the most effective places in school for students to build healthier, more intentional relationships with technology.
In short, in the age of AI, we need the arts more than ever.
…
Digital composition software, notation tools, and recording platforms allow students to experiment, revise, and refine their ideas in ways that would have been far more time-consuming a decade ago. Students can layer tracks, hear immediate playback, annotate their own scores, and collaborate across devices. The same is true in other contexts besides music; in visual arts, for instance, a variety of digital drawing and painting platforms enable students to practice with new mediums, styles, and techniques without having to worry about supplies or messes. But in either case, the core intellectual work of looking and listening critically, understanding structure, and making aesthetic choices remains entirely human and part of the learning.
From DSC:
I agree. At one of my previous positions, I spent 10 years supervising a digital studio — helping professors and students use a variety of applications to create things. The applications were from Adobe, Apple, and a variety of smaller vendors. The deliverables could be graphics, edited soundtracks, music, videos, flyers, posters, collages, edited photographs, presentations, websites, and more. I longed for people to discover the power of multimedia to communicate their messages, tell stories, stir emotion, powerfully engage themselves (and others), and unleash their creativity.
There were several obstacles to our digital studio being more impactful at that institution. It was under the IT department, not the academic side of the house. It was in the basement of the library, where few students and faculty traveled. During those years, it was highly uncommon for faculty members to require multimedia-based assignments — so many students had to WANT to develop these skills on their own time. The majority of students didn’t see the value in developing the types of digital skills that we were trying to build…or they didn’t have the time.
Also relevant/see:
Dr. Hardman’s post on LinkedIn
and/or
See Dr. Hardman’s post on substack.com entitled:
The Role of Faculty in the University of the Future — from er.educause.edu by Tanya Gamby, David Kil, Rachel Koblic, Paul LeBlanc, Mihnea Moldoveanu, and George Siemens
In the age of AI, the true future of higher education lies not in replacing faculty but in freeing them to do what only humans can—build meaningful relationships, cultivate wisdom, and guide students through the ethical and intellectual challenges machines cannot navigate.
Today, the work of knowledge transfer is often done better, faster, with more precision, and more patiently by AI. These systems can provide nonjudgmental, individualized learning opportunities twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Think of AI as a “genius teaching assistant” who assumes much of the work of basic knowledge transfer, unlocking learning when students get stuck and providing real-time assessment. Such a genius TA would offer faculty dashboards that update student progress, flag those who are struggling, and recommend targeted interventions. These tasks free faculty to focus on building genuine relationships with students, using the classroom to foster human skills, and curating community. This may be the great gift of AI to education. But it requires a profound reimagining of faculty roles—perhaps the single biggest hurdle to reimagining higher education, and equally its greatest opportunity.
A concerned faculty member might hear all this and conclude they are becoming obsolete. The opposite is true. The evolution of faculty roles demands more—not less—of what makes a great teacher.
This means intervening in high-impact moments when the genius TA has not unlocked learning; curating class time to lift students from knowing material to applying it in contexts that require critical thinking, judgment, and discernment; and cultivating the human skills that will be most prized in the age of AI: effective communication, constructive dialogue, empathy, creativity, and professional disposition. Most importantly, it means building genuine relationships with students—that make them feel like they matter—the kind that fuels transformation.
From DSC:
A quick comment on one of the sentences in the article, which asserts:
Centers for teaching and learning, which have long supported faculty development at many institutions, will be among the busiest places on campus in the years ahead.
I would change the word will be to should:
Centers for teaching and learning, which have long supported faculty development at many institutions, should be among the busiest places on campus in the years ahead.
For that statement to be true, centers for teaching and learning need to be well-versed in the tools and pedagogies involved, plus in learning science. Those centers need to have credibility for faculty members to value their services. And that’s just it, isn’t it? The faculty members need to see those centers for teaching and learning as having something that they lack…that they need assistance with. Otherwise, if such centers are just viewed as superfluous, nothing much will change.
Also, my experience has been that if those centers for teaching and learning are in an IT group/department, they should be moved to the academic side of the house instead. Many faculty members don’t value people from IT enough to make changes in how they teach — no matter how qualified those people are. They view those people as “IT” only.
You might also be interested in the other articles in that series:
Make learning accessible to all in higher education — from The Times Higher Education
When accessibility is placed at the heart of teaching and learning, rather than treated as a bolt-on, every student benefits. This week’s spotlight guide offers advice on designing universally accessible learning, in-person and online. Find out how to ease the burden of disability disclosure with universal design for learning, better support neurodivergent students and students with hearing or vision issues, design more accessible assessments and ensure digital tools work for all.
Something Big Is Happening — from shumer.dev by Matt Shumer; see below from the BIG Questions Institute, where I got this article from
I’ve spent six years building an AI startup and investing in the space. I live in this world. And I’m writing this for the people in my life who don’t… my family, my friends, the people I care about who keep asking me “so what’s the deal with AI?” and getting an answer that doesn’t do justice to what’s actually happening. I keep giving them the polite version. The cocktail-party version. Because the honest version sounds like I’ve lost my mind. And for a while, I told myself that was a good enough reason to keep what’s truly happening to myself. But the gap between what I’ve been saying and what is actually happening has gotten far too big. The people I care about deserve to hear what is coming, even if it sounds crazy.
…
They’ve now done it. And they’re moving on to everything else.
The experience that tech workers have had over the past year, of watching AI go from “helpful tool” to “does my job better than I do”, is the experience everyone else is about to have. Law, finance, medicine, accounting, consulting, writing, design, analysis, customer service. Not in ten years. The people building these systems say one to five years. Some say less. And given what I’ve seen in just the last couple of months, I think “less” is more likely.
…
The models available today are unrecognizable from what existed even six months ago. The debate about whether AI is “really getting better” or “hitting a wall” — which has been going on for over a year — is over. It’s done. Anyone still making that argument either hasn’t used the current models, has an incentive to downplay what’s happening, or is evaluating based on an experience from 2024 that is no longer relevant. I don’t say that to be dismissive. I say it because the gap between public perception and current reality is now enormous, and that gap is dangerous… because it’s preventing people from preparing.
What “Something Big Is Happening” Means for Schools — from/by the BIG Questions Institute
Matt Shumer’s newsletter post Something Big is Happening has been read over 80 million times within the week when it was published, on February 9.
…
Still, it’s worth reading Shumer’s post. Given the claims and warnings in Something Big Is Happening (and countless other articles), how would you truly, honestly respond to these questions:
The Learning and Employment Records (LER) Report for 2026: Building the infrastructure between learning and work — from smartresume.com; with thanks to Paul Fain for this resource
Executive Summary (excerpt)
This report documents a clear transition now underway: LERs are moving from small experiments to systems people and organizations expect to rely on. Adoption remains early and uneven, but the forces reshaping the ecosystem are no longer speculative. Federal policy signals, state planning cycles, standards maturation, and employer behavior are aligning in ways that suggest 2026 will mark a shift from exploration to execution.
Across interviews with federal leaders, state CIOs, standards bodies, and ecosystem builders, a consistent theme emerged: the traditional model—where institutions control learning and employment records—no longer fits how people move through education and work. In its place, a new model is being actively designed—one in which individuals hold portable, verifiable records that systems can trust without centralizing control.
Most states are not yet operating this way. But planning timelines, RFP language, and federal signals indicate that many will begin building toward this model in early 2026.
As the ecosystem matures, another insight becomes unavoidable: records alone are not enough. Value emerges only when trusted records can be interpreted through shared skill languages, reused across contexts, and embedded into the systems and marketplaces where decisions are made.
Learning and Employment Records are not a product category. They are a data layer—one that reshapes how learning, work, and opportunity connect over time.
This report is written for anyone seeking to understand how LERs are beginning to move from concept to practice. Whether readers are new to the space or actively exploring implementation, the report focuses on observable signals, emerging patterns, and the practical conditions required to move from experimentation toward durable infrastructure.
…
…
“The building blocks for a global, interoperable skills ecosystem are already in place. As education and workforce alignment accelerates, the path toward trusted, machine-readable credentials is clear. The next phase depends on credentials that carry value across institutions, industries, states, and borders; credentials that move with learners wherever their education and careers take them. The question now isn’t whether to act, but how quickly we move.”
– Curtiss Barnes, Chief Executive Officer, 1EdTech
The above item was from Paul Fain’s recent posting, which includes the following excerpt:
SmartResume just published a guide for making sense of this rapidly expanding landscape. The LER Ecosystem Report was produced in partnership with AACRAO, Credential Engine, 1EdTech, HR Open Standards, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation. It was based on interviews and feedback gathered over three years from 100+ leaders across education, workforce, government, standards bodies, and tech providers.
The tools are available now to create the sort of interoperable ecosystem that can make talent marketplaces a reality, the report argues. Meanwhile, federal policy moves and bipartisan attention to LERs are accelerating action at the state level.
“For state leaders, this creates a practical inflection point,” says the report. “LERs are shifting from an innovation discussion to an infrastructure planning conversation.”
Philippa provides a link to:
How to Design with AI in 2026 (based on the most compelling research published in 2025). — from linkedin.com by Dr. Philippa Hardman
AI’s Role in Online Learning > Take It or Leave It with Michelle Beavers, Leo Lo, and Sara McClellan — from intentionalteaching.buzzsprout.com by Derek Bruff
You’ll hear me briefly describe five recent op-eds on teaching and learning in higher ed. For each op-ed, I’ll ask each of our panelists if they “take it,” that is, generally agree with the main thesis of the essay, or “leave it.” This is an artificial binary that I’ve found to generate rich discussion of the issues at hand.
10 Tips from Smart Teaching Stronger Learning — from Pooja K. Agarwal, Ph.D.
Per Dr. Pooja Agarwal:
Combining two strategies—spacing and retrieval practice—is key to success in learning, says Shana Carpenter.
On a somewhat related note (i.e., for Instructional Designers, teachers, faculty members, T&L staff members), also see: