What Does “Doing Instructional Design Right” Really Mean in the AI Era?— The Essence of Learner eXperience Design (LXD)
「Right ISD | Instructional Design that Works」Series
This article examines instructional design and learner experience design across corporate learning, school education, and lifelong learning, highlighting perspectives that remain valid in the age of AI.
It explores the enduring essence of instructional design across corporate training, lifelong learning, and formal education, even as AI-driven technologies reshape learning environments. In particular, it addresses a persistent gap between the aspiration to implement learner-centered education—across blended environments that move fluidly between online and offline learning—and the reality that many instructional practices in the field still remain instructor-centered.
Moving beyond this reality, the article clarifies the perspectives instructional design must adopt in order to transform learning into a genuine learner experience rather than a structured delivery of content.
Ultimately, the success of education depends not on what was taught, but on what learners experienced—and how those experiences led to real change.
Why Does Education Sometimes Fail to Produce Change—Despite Our Best Efforts? Why is it that education, even when delivered with sincere effort, often fails to create meaningful change?
Decades of observation across corporate training, lifelong learning, schools, and community education point to a conclusion that is simple yet unmistakable: it is not the mere fact that instructional design was applied, but how it was applied that determines whether learning leads to change.
Many educators resonate with the saying, “Teaching does not guarantee learning.” Even the most carefully prepared instruction frequently fails to translate into learners’ understanding or behavioral change. This is more common than we might expect, and it stems from the persistent gap between knowing and doing.
Effective instructional design, therefore, must go beyond facilitating understanding. Its core purpose is to design experiences that help learners remember, apply, and repeatedly perform what they have learned in real situations. Flashy content or the latest instructional techniques do not determine success. What truly matters is whether the entire learning experience is intentionally aligned with the outcomes learners are expected to change.
In practice, however, many learning designs still remain at the level of content delivery, activity planning, or teaching techniques. Genuine change begins only when the entire learning experience is designed with outcomes at its center.
In corporate contexts, education gains meaning only when it connects to measurable outcomes such as productivity, leadership effectiveness, or improved customer experience.
In schools and communities, its value lies in changes in behavior, life choices, and the ability to solve real-world problems. Knowledge transmission alone is no longer sufficient.
Experience Alone Is Not Enough—for Instructors or Instructional Designers
Educators often design learning based on their own teaching or learning experiences. While personal experience is undoubtedly valuable, it is insufficient on its own. Without the integration of theory, research, and validated design principles, education easily becomes a non-reproducible “personal craft.”
Instructional design requires systematic thinking in which learning objectives, content, methods, and assessment are coherently aligned. This approach allows designers to account for diverse learner characteristics and needs while maximizing educational effectiveness.
For example, when designing a leadership program for team leaders in a corporate setting, relying solely on past success stories or existing lecture materials rarely leads to measurable organizational performance improvement.
Similarly, in schools, creative problem-solving instruction remains superficial if learners are not intentionally guided through experiences that require them to solve real-life problems. Learning stays at the level of conceptual understanding.
Personal experience may serve as a starting point for design, but it is not a sufficient condition. Sustainable change becomes possible only when learning experiences are designed on a systematic and scientific foundation.
I. Why Learner Experience Design (LXD)—Not Just “Learning Experience” Design?
Traditional instructional approaches have often been instructor-centered. In contemporary education, however, designing from the learner’s perspective has become a decisive factor in learning effectiveness.
This includes:
Designing learning environments that reflect learners’ abilities, interests, and needs
Creating experiences that enable active participation and self-construction of knowledge
Research consistently confirms that higher levels of learner engagement and immersion lead to significantly improved learning outcomes. Education is not mere transmission; it must be an experience through which learners actively construct and apply knowledge.
The very term “learning experience” reflects a shift in educational focus toward the learner. Yet in practice, instructional design often remains anchored in the instructor’s viewpoint. The moment we replace “learning” with “learner” in our thinking, the design perspective fundamentally shifts. Attention moves away from content and activities and toward how learners experience change.
Instructional design is not simply about preparing lessons; it is about enabling learners to understand and apply what they learn. Proper learner experience design goes beyond good lesson preparation—it is the intentional creation of learner-centered, context-centered, and outcome-centered experiences.
In corporate learning, this means designing project-based learning that enables learners to solve real organizational problems. In schools, it involves experiments, inquiry, and discussion that support knowledge construction. In lifelong learning, meaning becomes clear when learners engage in practical tasks that can be immediately applied to their work or lives.
Ultimately, learner experience design is not about structuring classes but about designing the journey through which learners change. The same content can yield entirely different results depending on learners’ backgrounds, motivations, and contexts. For this reason, the starting point of design must always be not what the instructor will say, but what learners must ultimately be able to do.
II. Why Learner Experience Design Matters Even More in the Age of AI
As discussed earlier, the success of education depends not on how much was taught, but on what learners actually experience and how they change. This question becomes even more critical in an era where AI is ubiquitous.
Generative AI now supports content creation, automated assessment, learning analytics, and personalized recommendations, dramatically expanding efficiency and accessibility. Rather than diminishing the essence of education, these developments clarify what instructional design must truly focus on.
The central issue in the AI era is not competition between humans and technology, but differentiation of roles. AI excels at organizing information, automating feedback and assessment, and analyzing learner response data across online and offline environments. What remains firmly within the designer’s domain is determining how learners interpret information, transform it into action, and assign meaning to their experiences. The more technology takes over, the more critical learner experience design becomes.
Learner Experience Design does not place AI at the center of education. It places human learning—how people are motivated, how change is sustained, and how experiences shape behavior—at the center. While AI can be a powerful support tool, decisions about when and how it is integrated into the learner experience remain the responsibility of the designer. In the AI era, the core instructional design question shifts from “Which technology should we use?” to “What will learners experience through this process?”
Learner-Centered Design: Where AI and ADDIE Intersect
Learning is not the passive receipt of information but a continuous process of exploration, connection, and meaning-making. AI can accelerate this process, but it cannot replace its purpose.
Where instructional design once focused on what to teach, it now focuses on what experiences will lead to change. This applies equally to online, offline, and workplace-based learning.
In corporate education, AI can support ADDIE’s Analysis and Evaluation phases by analyzing performance and learning data. Yet real performance change occurs only when experiential components—on-the-job tasks, coaching, and feedback—are intentionally designed alongside online content.
In schools, AI can provide level-appropriate materials, but critical thinking and discussion emerge through classroom interaction and designed activities. In lifelong learning, while recommendation and management can be automated, transfer to real life still requires intentional design.
Across all phases of ADDIE, AI expands—not replaces—design. It enriches analysis, supports diverse learning pathways in design and development, stabilizes implementation, and refines evaluation. At every stage, learner experience must remain central.
Instructional design in the AI era is not about listing technological possibilities, but about placing those possibilities within a coherent learner experience flow. Ultimately, designers return to a foundational question:
“For whom, toward what change, and through what experiential journey are we designing?”
To answer this systematically, designers need a structural backbone for thinking—this is where ADDIE, often mischaracterized as outdated, regains relevance.
III. ADDIE Is Not Outdated—It Is the Structural Backbone of Learning Design in the AI Era
As discussed earlier, learner experience design in the age of AI is not primarily a question of technology adoption, but of the designer’s underlying way of thinking. AI can enrich analysis, accelerate development, and enhance evaluation across learning environments. At the same time, this expanded capability makes it even more critical for designers to be clear about what they are deciding, on what basis, and in what sequence.
In this context, revisiting the ADDIE model is not a step backward, but a strategic necessity. Composed of Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation, ADDIE is often misunderstood as a linear and outdated procedural model. In practice, however, it functions less as a rigid process and more as a cognitive framework that helps designers maintain coherence and balance in complex learning systems.
ADDIE remains relevant not because it dictates specific methods, but because it supports disciplined thinking about learner context, performance gaps, and outcome alignment. In the AI era, this role becomes even more important. Introducing advanced tools or sophisticated content without a deep understanding of the learner’s real-world context may increase speed and efficiency, but it does not guarantee meaningful or sustainable change.
Crucially, ADDIE is not a closed, one-way sequence. It is a cyclical and iterative system in which design, implementation, and evaluation continuously inform one another. When viewed through the lens of Learner Experience Design (LXD), each ADDIE phase can be reframed around a single, unifying question:
“What is the learner experiencing at this stage, and how does that experience shape behavior and performance?”
This question transforms ADDIE from a procedural checklist into a framework for intentional experience design.
1. Analysis: Understanding Learners and Context in Depth
Analysis begins before deciding what to teach. It starts with understanding who the learners are, what context they operate in, and what kind of change is being demanded of them. This phase represents the designer’s most critical thinking process prior to instruction.
Analysis is not merely about collecting requirements or data. It involves synthesizing learners’ backgrounds, experience levels, expectations, resistance, task complexity, environmental constraints, and organizational or institutional conditions from a human-centered perspective.
In online environments, data such as learning histories, system logs, and performance metrics are relatively accessible. In offline contexts, interviews, surveys, field observations, and analysis of existing practices become primary sources. What matters most is not individual data points, but how those data reveal the underlying structure of the problem—and where learning intervention is truly needed.
AI can assist by organizing large volumes of information and identifying recurring patterns. However, determining what constitutes the core learning problem and what kind of experience can address it remains a fundamentally human judgment.
2. Design: Mapping the Learner’s Journey from Beginning to End
Design is not the act of organizing content; it is the intentional mapping of the learner’s experiential journey. Designers must envision how learners will move through moments of curiosity, engagement, struggle, reflection, and application.
Rather than asking only what information should be presented, design asks:
Where does motivation emerge?
At what points does engagement deepen?
Which interactions trigger reflection and self-awareness?
How does experience gradually lead to behavioral change?
In blended environments—where online and offline, synchronous and asynchronous learning coexist—both intended and unintended experiences become part of the design outcome. AI-driven guidance and feedback shape learner choices online, while immediate human interaction and classroom dynamics shape experience offline. Learner Experience Design requires designers to anticipate and align these touchpoints so that the overall flow supports the target performance.
3. Development: Turning Learning Materials into Experiential Tools
Development is not simply the production of materials; it is the construction of tools that allow learners to act, receive feedback, and try again.
In the AI era, development is characterized by rapid prototyping and iterative refinement across both digital and physical learning environments. Generative AI can quickly produce drafts and variations of content, but speed alone does not ensure effective learning.
Designers must contextualize materials by embedding emotional cues, interaction opportunities, and realistic scenarios. The faster development becomes, the more important it is to decide not just what to create, but what learners will actually experience through those materials.
4. Implementation: Making Learning Experience Real
Implementation is not the delivery of a plan; it is the moment when the designed learner experience meets reality.
In online settings, participation patterns, engagement signals, and learner responses can be monitored continuously. In offline environments, the quality of interaction, classroom climate, and immediacy of feedback become decisive. Adjustments made during implementation are not signs of design failure, but integral components of experiential validation.
Coaching, feedback, questioning strategies, and dialogue structures play a critical role at this stage. Implementation tests whether the designed experience truly functions as intended.
5. Evaluation: Interpreting Change and Feeding It Back into Design
Evaluation is not the endpoint of learning, but an extension of design thinking. It examines not only what learners remember, but how their behavior has changed—and whether that change persists in real contexts.
AI can support evaluation by aggregating and comparing performance data, but interpreting the meaning of change and translating it into design improvement remains a human responsibility. Through this process, ADDIE naturally cycles back into analysis, allowing learner experience design to evolve continuously.
Taken together, ADDIE’s phases form a connected flow of design thinking centered on learner experience and behavior change. AI enhances this flow, but it does not replace the designer’s role in making principled decisions. In this sense, ADDIE is best understood not as a methodology, but as the structural backbone that supports effective learner experience design.
IV. Four Core Principles That Sustain Effective Learner Experience Design
Learner Experience Design (LXD) is not about arranging activities attractively or adopting new tools. The quality of learning outcomes depends on the criteria designers use when making countless design decisions. The following four principles provide a stable foundation for those decisions across corporate education, school education, and lifelong learning.
1. Performance-Driven Design
The essence of education is not knowledge acquisition itself, but meaningful change. In corporate settings, this change appears as improved productivity, leadership effectiveness, or customer experience. In schools and communities, it manifests as shifts in learners’ behavior, thinking, and life choices.
Performance-driven design begins not with what to teach, but with what learners must be able to do after learning. It requires identifying the true causes of performance gaps and designing experiences that directly support target behaviors.
This approach considers not only individual capability, but also environmental factors such as organizational culture, resources, incentive structures, and motivation. As a result, performance-driven design is inherently iterative, continuously refined through real performance data rather than ending with a single program.
2. Learner-First and Choice-Enabled Design
Without a deep understanding of learners’ backgrounds, readiness, motivation, and constraints, even the most sophisticated design fails to produce change. Learner-centered design is not a matter of consideration—it is a strategic prerequisite for performance.
Change does not occur through explanation alone, but through experience and execution. Therefore, practical tasks and repeated action are essential. Approaches such as action learning, project-based learning, and problem-centered learning formalize this principle by structuring experience around real tasks.
When learners are given meaningful choices and opportunities for ownership, responsibility and engagement increase naturally.
3. Learning Science–Based Design
Effective learner experience design does not rely solely on intuition or personal teaching experience. It is grounded in learning psychology, cognitive science, behavior change theory, and Human Performance Technology (HPT).
Every activity must answer two questions:
Why is this experience necessary?
What specific behavior or performance does it support?
In the AI era, this principle becomes even more important. AI can analyze learner responses and suggest personalized feedback, but it should function as a decision-support tool—not a substitute for professional judgment.
4. Complete Learning Experience–Driven Design
Learning does not end with instruction. Sustainable behavior change emerges when the full journey—preparation, learning, transfer, and achievement or recognition—is coherently designed.
Before learning, expectations and readiness must be shaped. After learning, transfer strategies, feedback, and recognition must follow. Whether in corporate onboarding, classroom instruction, or lifelong learning, designing the entire journey as one connected experience is essential for lasting growth.
V. Ultimately, Instructional Design Is the Design of Human Change
Even in an AI-driven world, the essence of instructional design remains unchanged. It is the intentional design of experiences through which people change.
Technology can accelerate content creation and analysis, but what learners value, choose, and change through experience remains a human-centered design challenge.
Effective instructional design imagines—until the very end—what learners will do differently in real contexts. In this process, AI becomes a partner that extends and validates the designer’s thinking.
Learner Experience Design is not a mechanism that leads learners to correct answers. It is a structure that enables them to choose, try, fail, and grow. Through such experiences, learners move beyond knowledge to new ways of thinking and acting.
Ultimately, education must not produce well-structured lessons—but experiences that make change inevitable.
This article is part of the BBL Learning series 「Right ISD | Instructional Design that Works.」
The series continuously explores, from the perspectives of Learner Experience Design (LXD) and performance-driven instructional design, what designers must consider to ensure that learning leads to real change.
Related Articles | Right ISD Series
[Copyright and Usage Notice]
© 2025 Mijeong Kim. All Rights Reserved.
All content in this article—including text, structure, and logical progression—is copyrighted by Mijeong Kim and officially published as part of BBL Learning. No part of this article may be reproduced, distributed, or used commercially without the explicit permission of the copyright holder. When citing, please clearly indicate the source (Mijeong Kim · BBL Learning, including the original link).
※ This content may not be used in any form—including collection for AI training, crawling, or reprocessing—without authorization.
