Glanz: aiMOOC über GPT aiMOOC Action erstellt

2026-09-01T07:05:26Z

aiMOOC über GPT aiMOOC Action erstellt

Neue Seite

{{T}}
[[Category:English]]
[[Category:Instructional Design]]

{{BR}}
= Introduction =

'''Instructional design''' is the systematic and iterative design of learning experiences, resources, activities, and assessments so that learners can achieve meaningful outcomes. In university settings, instructional design applies to a single seminar, a laboratory activity, a fully online degree module, workplace learning, or an entire curriculum. It connects what learners need, what they should be able to do, how they will practice, how they will demonstrate learning, and how the design will be evaluated.

Instructional design is not simply the production of slides, videos, or digital courses. A strong design begins with a learning problem and a context. It then uses evidence, theory, design frameworks, prototyping, feedback, and evaluation to create an experience that is coherent, accessible, and feasible.

[[File:Instructional design types - Hamdani.jpg|500px|frameless|center]]

By the end of this aiMOOC, you should be able to analyze a learning context, formulate assessable outcomes, align assessment and learning activities, compare design frameworks, create a prototype, plan for learner variability and accessibility, and evaluate whether a design is working.

{{BR}}
= Foundations of Instructional Design =

{{BR}}
== A Systems Perspective ==

Instructional design treats teaching and learning as a connected system. Changing one part of a course often affects other parts. If you change a learning outcome from "describe" to "design," for example, a recall quiz may no longer provide suitable evidence. Learners may need opportunities to analyze examples, make design decisions, receive feedback, revise their work, and produce an authentic design artifact.

A systems perspective encourages you to ask four linked questions: Who are the learners and what is the context? What should learners know or be able to do? What evidence would show that learning has occurred? What experiences and supports will help learners reach the intended outcome?

{{BR}}
== Learning Theories as Design Lenses ==

Instructional designers use learning theories as lenses rather than as recipes. [[English:Behaviorism|Behaviorism]] can inform designs that require clear cues, practice, and feedback. [[English:Cognitivism|Cognitivism]] directs attention to memory, prior knowledge, mental models, and cognitive load. [[English:Constructivism|Constructivism]] emphasizes active meaning-making, authentic problems, and the role of prior experience. [[English:Social learning theory|Social learning theory]] highlights observation, collaboration, modeling, and participation with others.

The design question is therefore not "Which theory is always best?" but "Which explanation of learning helps me make better decisions for this goal, these learners, and this context?" Effective courses often combine principles from several traditions.

[[File:Merrill's First Principles of Instruction.png|500px|frameless|center]]

Merrill's First Principles of Instruction offer one practical synthesis: learning can be organized around meaningful problems while activating prior knowledge, demonstrating new knowledge, giving learners opportunities to apply it, and supporting integration into real practice.

{{BR}}
= Analyze Learners, Needs, and Context =

{{BR}}
== Start with the Learning Problem ==

A design project should begin by distinguishing a learning problem from a performance problem. If students cannot interpret statistical output because they lack conceptual knowledge, instruction may help. If they already have the skill but cannot access the required software, the main barrier is not instruction. Good analysis prevents teams from building a course when a different intervention would be more appropriate.

For a university course or module, investigate learners' prior knowledge, disciplinary background, language demands, access needs, motivations, time constraints, available technology, assessment regulations, class size, teaching format, and opportunities for feedback. Avoid assuming that a cohort is homogeneous. Learner variability should be anticipated from the beginning.

{{BR}}
== Write a Useful Design Brief ==

A concise design brief can record the learning challenge, learner profile, constraints, success criteria, stakeholders, available resources, risks, and evidence that will be used to judge the design. This document becomes a shared reference for instructors, instructional designers, media specialists, librarians, accessibility experts, and students who may participate in co-design.

{{BR}}
= Define Learning Outcomes =

{{BR}}
== From Topics to Observable Performance ==

A topic such as "research ethics" does not yet specify what learners should do. A learning outcome should describe a meaningful capability. For example, "By the end of the module, students can evaluate a proposed research procedure against stated ethical principles and justify a recommendation using evidence." This outcome is more useful because it guides both assessment and learning activity design.

Strong outcomes are clear enough to support design decisions but not so narrow that they reduce complex learning to trivial behavior. At university level, outcomes often involve analysis, judgment, creation, transfer, collaboration, or responsible professional practice.

[[File:Bloom taxonomy.svg|500px|frameless|center]]

Bloom's revised taxonomy is widely used as a vocabulary for cognitive processes such as remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating. Use it to check the intellectual demand of an outcome, not as a rule that every course must climb a fixed staircase in the same order.

{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQI3v2_PSZI|500|center}}

The interview above, published by Augusta University, connects revised Bloom's taxonomy with cognitive theory of multimedia learning and is useful for reflecting on the relationship between intended thinking processes and instructional choices.

{{BR}}
= Design Frameworks =

{{BR}}
== ADDIE ==

ADDIE is a widely used instructional systems design framework. Its five phases are Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation. In practice, these phases are often revisited as evidence emerges, so ADDIE can be used iteratively rather than as a rigid waterfall.

[[File:ADDIE Model of ID.jpg|500px|frameless|center]]

'''Analysis''' identifies the learning need, learners, context, constraints, and desired change. '''Design''' specifies outcomes, assessment, learning activities, sequencing, media, and support. '''Development''' produces and tests resources and learning experiences. '''Implementation''' prepares and delivers the learning experience. '''Evaluation''' examines quality, learning evidence, implementation data, and opportunities for improvement.

{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEAxYija9OU|500|center}}

The university lecture above presents ADDIE in an instructional design context. While watching, note which questions belong to each phase and where iteration would be necessary in a real project.

{{BR}}
== Backward Design ==

[[English:Backward design|Backward design]] begins with the destination. First, identify the desired results. Second, determine what acceptable evidence would show that learners have achieved those results. Third, plan learning experiences and instruction that prepare learners to produce that evidence.

This order helps prevent a common design error: choosing activities or technologies first and trying to justify them later. Backward design does not prohibit creativity. It gives creativity a purpose by connecting activities to evidence and outcomes.

{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbKx_tG99ho|500|center}}

The university teaching-center video above demonstrates the backward design process. As you watch, compare its sequence with ADDIE. Backward design focuses strongly on alignment among results, evidence, and learning experiences, while ADDIE provides a broader project cycle.

{{BR}}
== Constructive Alignment ==

[[English:Constructive alignment|Constructive alignment]] connects intended learning outcomes, assessment, and learning activities so that they support the same level and type of learning. If students are expected to evaluate competing theories, they need practice evaluating theories and an assessment that requires evaluation. If the final assessment only asks for definitions, the design sends conflicting signals about what matters.

Alignment is dynamic. When an assessment changes, you should review the outcomes and activities. When a learning outcome becomes more ambitious, learners may need additional practice, scaffolding, or feedback.

{{BR}}
== Motivational Design with ARCS ==

The ARCS model, associated with John Keller, organizes motivational design around '''Attention''', '''Relevance''', '''Confidence''', and '''Satisfaction'''. It reminds designers that motivation is not an optional decoration added after content has been produced.

[[File:ARCS model components table.svg|500px|frameless|center]]

You can use ARCS diagnostically. If learners do not see why a task matters, strengthen relevance with authentic cases or professional applications. If they expect failure, improve confidence through transparent criteria, graduated challenge, examples, and feedback. If participation is passive, consider whether attention and meaningful choice can be improved.

{{BR}}
= Assessment and Feedback =

{{BR}}
== Assessment as Evidence ==

Assessment should provide evidence about the intended learning. A valid design question is therefore, "What would convince us that the learner can actually do what the outcome claims?" For a design outcome, a design artifact with a rationale may be stronger evidence than a multiple-choice test. For a safety-critical procedure, demonstration under defined conditions may be necessary.

'''Formative assessment''' is used during learning to generate information that can improve subsequent performance. Examples include practice problems, drafts, minute papers, peer review, simulations, and low-stakes quizzes. '''Summative assessment''' evaluates achievement at a defined point, such as a final project, examination, portfolio, performance, or capstone presentation. A course can use both, with formative opportunities preparing learners for summative performance.

{{BR}}
== Feedback and Rubrics ==

Feedback is most useful when learners can act on it. Design feedback loops so that comments arrive before the next relevant attempt. Rubrics can clarify criteria, support consistent judgment, and help learners understand quality. However, a rubric should not reduce complex work to mechanical box-checking. Criteria should reflect the actual learning outcomes and leave room for defensible variation where appropriate.

{{BR}}
= Learning Activities, Media, and Technology =

{{BR}}
== Select Activities for the Intended Learning ==

Learning activities should require learners to practice the kind of thinking or performance they will eventually demonstrate. Case analysis supports judgment. Worked examples can support early skill acquisition. Discussion can support interpretation and argument when prompts require evidence. Simulations can support decision-making under realistic constraints. Projects can integrate knowledge, inquiry, creation, and reflection.

The key is purposeful activity. "Active learning" does not simply mean physical movement or constant group work. Learners should be intellectually engaged in retrieving, explaining, comparing, applying, creating, testing, or reflecting.

{{BR}}
== Choose Media by Function ==

Media should be selected because of what they help learners perceive, understand, practice, or create. A diagram may make relationships visible. Video can demonstrate a dynamic procedure. Audio can convey pronunciation or expert reasoning. Interactive media can allow manipulation and feedback. Text remains valuable for precise, searchable, self-paced study.

When combining media, manage unnecessary cognitive load. Signal structure, segment complex explanations, remove irrelevant decoration, and connect visuals directly to the ideas they are intended to clarify. A media-rich course is not automatically a well-designed course; relevance and accessibility matter more than quantity.

{{BR}}
== Prototype Before You Produce at Scale ==

A prototype can be a storyboard, sample lesson, wireframe, assessment draft, short video segment, or clickable mock-up. Prototypes make assumptions visible and allow early testing before production becomes expensive.

Test prototypes with representative learners when possible. Ask them to complete realistic tasks rather than only asking whether they "like" the design. Observe misunderstandings, navigation problems, ambiguous instructions, inaccessible features, and places where learners need more or less support.

{{BR}}
= Accessibility, Inclusion, and Universal Design for Learning =

Accessibility is a design requirement, not a final compliance check. Plan for captions and transcripts, readable structure, keyboard access, sufficient contrast, meaningful alternative text, accessible documents, clear language, and compatibility with assistive technologies. Check the requirements of your institution and jurisdiction as part of the design brief.

[[English:Universal Design for Learning|Universal Design for Learning]] or UDL encourages designers to anticipate learner variability and reduce unnecessary barriers. CAST's UDL Guidelines 3.0 organize design considerations around multiple means of engagement, representation, and action and expression, while also emphasizing learner agency, identity, and barriers that can arise from systems and bias.

[[File:Universal Design For Learning (8527950743).jpg|500px|frameless|center]]

{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDvKnY0g6e4|500|center}}

CAST's "UDL at a Glance" video provides a concise introduction to designing curriculum for learner variability. Use UDL to widen access to learning while keeping the intended learning goal clear. Options are especially useful when the mode of response is not itself the skill being assessed.

{{BR}}
= Evaluation and Iteration =

Evaluation asks whether the design is usable, feasible, equitable, instructionally effective, and worth improving or scaling. Collect evidence during development and implementation rather than waiting until the end.

At the learner level, evidence may include performance, misconceptions, completion patterns, confidence, transfer, and reflections. At the course level, evidence may include alignment, accessibility findings, participation, assessment quality, instructor workload, and technical reliability. At the program level, evidence may include progression, professional performance, stakeholder feedback, and longer-term outcomes.

Interpret data carefully. Completion rates alone do not prove learning, satisfaction does not equal mastery, and grades may be affected by assessment design. Combine quantitative and qualitative evidence when possible, and protect privacy when collecting learning analytics.

{{BR}}
= Instructional Design in the Age of Generative AI =

Generative AI can support brainstorming, drafting examples, generating alternative explanations, creating practice items, summarizing feedback themes, or prototyping scenarios. Its use does not remove the need for instructional judgment. Designers must verify accuracy, consider bias, protect student data and intellectual property, and make expectations for AI use transparent.

When AI is part of an assessment, decide what the assessment is intended to measure. If the goal includes independent recall or unaided performance, restrict AI accordingly. If the professional practice being taught legitimately includes AI-assisted work, design the assessment so that students must demonstrate judgment, verification, documentation, and responsibility rather than simply submitting generated output.

{{BR}}
= Worked Example: Redesigning a University Seminar =

Imagine a master's-level seminar in which students are expected to "critically evaluate instructional interventions." The existing course consists mainly of lectures and a final examination that asks students to define terminology.

A redesign begins with analysis. Students already know basic terminology but have limited experience judging real interventions. The desired performance is therefore evaluation, not recall. The assessment becomes a structured critique of an authentic instructional-design case, supported by evidence and a defensible recommendation.

Learning activities are then aligned with that outcome. Students compare strong and weak case analyses, practice applying criteria to short cases, discuss trade-offs, receive feedback on a draft critique, and revise. The instructor provides a rubric that emphasizes reasoning, evidence, attention to learner context, accessibility, and feasibility. Evaluation data include the quality of final critiques, patterns in rubric scores, student reflections on difficult decisions, and instructor observations about where additional scaffolding is needed.

This example illustrates a central principle: good instructional design creates a coherent pathway from learner need to outcome, evidence, practice, support, and evaluation.

{{BR}}
= Evidence-Informed Design Resources =

The following resources support the concepts used in this course and are suitable starting points for deeper university-level study.

{| class="wikitable"
! Resource
! Design relevance
|-
| [https://www.cmu.edu/teaching/designteach/design/learningobjectives.html Carnegie Mellon University: Learning Objectives]
| Explains alignment among learning objectives, assessment, and instructional strategies.
|-
| [https://www.cmu.edu/teaching/designteach/design/assessments.html Carnegie Mellon University: Align Assessments with Objectives]
| Provides guidance for choosing assessments that produce evidence of intended learning.
|-
| [https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/59/coursera.pdf Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching: Backward Design]
| Summarizes the sequence of desired results, acceptable evidence, and learning experiences.
|-
| [https://udlguidelines.cast.org/ CAST UDL Guidelines 3.0]
| Provides current research-informed guidance for designing around learner variability and reducing barriers.
|-
| [https://poorvucenter.yale.edu/guiding-principles-for-teaching-and-learning-with-ai Yale Poorvu Center: Guiding Principles for Teaching and Learning with AI]
| Highlights privacy, transparency, academic integrity, and responsible AI use in teaching and learning.
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructional_design English Wikipedia: Instructional design]
| Offers an open overview of the field, its history, theories, and major models.
|}

{{BR}}
= Interactive Tasks =

{{BR}}
== Quiz: Test Your Knowledge ==

{{MC}}

'''What is the primary purpose of instructional design?'''
(To create coherent learning experiences that help learners achieve intended outcomes)
(!To maximize the number of digital tools in a course)
(!To replace instructors with automated systems)
(!To make every course follow the same teaching method)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''Which question belongs most directly to the Analysis phase of ADDIE?'''
(What do learners need and what constraints shape the learning context)
(!Which final video codec should be used)
(!Which certificate design looks most attractive)
(!Which color should be used for every heading)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''What comes second in backward design?'''
(Determine acceptable evidence of learning)
(!Select classroom furniture)
(!Publish all course media)
(!Choose a learning management system theme)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''What does constructive alignment connect?'''
(Learning outcomes assessment and learning activities)
(!Tuition fees room bookings and attendance)
(!Logos fonts and page colors)
(!Research grants libraries and parking)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''Which outcome is most suitable for assessing higher level judgment?'''
(Evaluate two instructional proposals and justify a recommendation)
(!List five design terms from memory)
(!Copy a definition from a glossary)
(!Identify the title of a textbook)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''What is the main purpose of formative assessment?'''
(To generate information that can improve learning before final judgment)
(!To assign the final course grade only)
(!To eliminate the need for feedback)
(!To rank institutions by reputation)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''What does Universal Design for Learning encourage designers to do?'''
(Anticipate learner variability and reduce unnecessary barriers)
(!Create one identical pathway for every learner)
(!Avoid all forms of assessment)
(!Use video instead of every other medium)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''Why is prototyping valuable in instructional design?'''
(It reveals problems and assumptions before full scale production)
(!It guarantees that no future revision will be needed)
(!It replaces learner testing)
(!It removes the need for learning outcomes)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''What is the best reason to select a particular medium?'''
(It supports the intended learning function and is accessible to learners)
(!It is the newest technology available)
(!It contains the greatest number of animations)
(!It requires the most expensive equipment)

{{E}}
<br>

{{MC}}

'''Which statement best describes evaluation in instructional design?'''
(It uses evidence to judge and improve the design)
(!It happens only after a course has ended)
(!It measures satisfaction and nothing else)
(!It should ignore implementation problems)

{{E}}
<br>

{{BR}}
== Memory Game ==

<div class="memo-quiz">
{|
|-
| Needs analysis || Investigation of the learning problem learners context constraints and desired change
|-
| Learning objective || Clear statement of the knowledge or capability learners should achieve
|-
| Formative assessment || Evidence gathered during learning to guide improvement
|-
| Summative assessment || Evidence used to judge achievement at a defined point
|-
| Constructive alignment || Coherence among intended outcomes assessment and learning activities
|-
| Universal Design for Learning || Framework for anticipating variability and reducing unnecessary barriers
|}
{{E}}
<br>

{{BR}}
== Drag and Drop ==

<div class="lueckentext-quiz">

{| class="wikitable"
! Match the correct terms.
! Topic
|-
| '''Analysis'''
| Identify learner needs context constraints and the performance gap
|-
| '''Design'''
| Plan outcomes assessment activities sequence media and support
|-
| '''Development'''
| Produce prototype test and refine learning resources
|-
| '''Implementation'''
| Prepare facilitators learners systems and delivery
|-
| '''Evaluation'''
| Judge quality learning evidence implementation and opportunities for revision
|}
{{E}}

<br>
...
<br />

{{BR}}
== Crossword Puzzle ==

<div class="kreuzwort-quiz">
{|
|-
| Alignment || What term describes coherence among outcomes assessment and learning activities
|-
| Prototype || What early version is built to test ideas before full production
|-
| Feedback || What information helps a learner improve a later attempt
|-
| Accessibility || What design quality enables people with diverse access needs to use learning resources
|-
| Evaluation || What process judges quality effectiveness and opportunities for improvement
|-
| Scaffolding || What temporary support helps learners perform a task they cannot yet complete independently
|}
{{E}}
<br>

{{BR}}
== LearningApps ==

<iframe> https://learningapps.org/index.php?s=Instructional+Design </iframe>

{{BR}}
== Cloze Text ==

<quiz display=simple>
{'''Complete the text.'''<br>
|type="{}"}
Instructional design should begin with { analysis } of the learning problem and context. Clear { outcomes } state what learners should know or be able to do. Backward design asks for acceptable { evidence } before learning activities are planned. Constructive alignment connects outcomes assessment and { activities }. A useful { prototype } allows designers to test assumptions before full production. Formative assessment creates opportunities for actionable { feedback }. Universal Design for Learning helps reduce unnecessary { barriers } for variable learners. Evaluation supports evidence-informed { iteration } of the complete design.
</quiz>

<br>

{{BR}}
= Open-Ended Tasks =

{{BR}}
=== Easy ===
# [[English:Learning outcome audit|Learning outcome audit]]: Choose one university course you know and rewrite three topic statements as observable learning outcomes, then explain how the wording changes possible assessment choices.
# [[English:Media purpose map|Media purpose map]]: Select four different learning media from a course and identify the learning function each medium serves, noting any item that appears decorative or redundant.
# [[English:Barrier walk-through|Barrier walk-through]]: Review one online learning page from the perspective of a keyboard user, a multilingual learner, and a student using captions, then record at least five design improvements.
# [[English:Formative feedback sketch|Formative feedback sketch]]: Design a short formative activity for a difficult concept and specify when learners receive feedback and how they can use it in a second attempt.

{{BR}}
=== Standard ===
# [[English:Backward design blueprint|Backward design blueprint]]: Create a one-page blueprint for a university module that links desired results, acceptable evidence, learning activities, and learner support.
# [[English:ADDIE project plan|ADDIE project plan]]: Develop a realistic ADDIE plan for redesigning a two-week unit, including stakeholders, constraints, deliverables, risks, and one iteration point in each phase.
# [[English:Prototype and usability test|Prototype and usability test]]: Build a low-fidelity prototype of a learning resource, test it with two peers performing a defined task, and revise it using observed evidence.
# [[English:Instructional design interview|Instructional design interview]]: Interview an instructor, instructional designer, tutor, or learning technologist about one real design decision and compare their reasoning with the principles in this course.

{{BR}}
=== Advanced ===
# [[English:Constructive alignment analysis|Constructive alignment analysis]]: Analyze a complete course syllabus and produce an alignment matrix connecting outcomes, assessments, activities, and feedback opportunities, then diagnose at least three mismatches.
# [[English:Inclusive assessment redesign|Inclusive assessment redesign]]: Redesign a major university assessment to improve authenticity and accessibility while preserving the intended construct, and defend every change with explicit design reasoning.
# [[English:Learning analytics evaluation plan|Learning analytics evaluation plan]]: Create an ethical evaluation plan for a digital course that combines quantitative and qualitative evidence, defines decision rules, and explains privacy protections and limits of interpretation.
# [[English:AI supported instructional design study|AI supported instructional design study]]: Compare a human-only and AI-assisted workflow for one design task, document prompts and verification steps, evaluate quality and risk, and present recommendations for responsible university practice.

{{:Open Task - Create a MOOC}}

{{BR}}
= Learning Assessment =

# [[English:Alignment case analysis|Alignment case analysis]]: Given a course with advanced outcomes but recall-only assessments, diagnose the design problem and propose a revised assessment and activity sequence that would produce credible evidence of learning.
# [[English:Framework comparison|Framework comparison]]: Compare ADDIE and backward design for a complex university redesign project, explaining where each framework provides leverage and where an iterative hybrid approach would be more useful.
# [[English:Prototype defense|Prototype defense]]: Present a prototype learning activity and defend its design using learner analysis, intended outcomes, accessibility considerations, and expected evidence of learning.
# [[English:Assessment validity review|Assessment validity review]]: Evaluate whether a proposed assessment actually measures its stated outcome, identify threats to validity or fairness, and redesign the task where necessary.
# [[English:UDL transfer challenge|UDL transfer challenge]]: Redesign one learning experience for greater learner variability without lowering the academic standard, and explain which barriers are reduced and which core requirements remain fixed.
# [[English:Evaluation decision memo|Evaluation decision memo]]: Analyze a mixed set of learner performance data, survey comments, accessibility findings, and instructor observations, then recommend whether to revise, continue, or scale the design and justify the decision.

<br>
<br>

{{BR}}
= Evidence of Learning =

Evidence of learning should show not only that you can name models but that you can use instructional design reasoning in unfamiliar situations.

{| class="wikitable"
! Evidence type
! What strong evidence looks like
|-
| Knowledge
| Accurate explanation of core concepts such as analysis alignment assessment prototyping accessibility UDL and evaluation
|-
| Skills
| Ability to formulate outcomes analyze learners select evidence design activities prototype test and revise
|-
| Products
| Design brief alignment matrix storyboard prototype rubric evaluation plan or complete module blueprint
|-
| Reasoning
| Explicit justification of design choices including trade-offs constraints learner variability and evidence quality
|-
| Transfer
| Successful adaptation of principles to a new discipline modality learner group technology or professional setting
|-
| Reflection
| Thoughtful use of feedback and evaluation data to explain what should be retained revised or abandoned
|}

<br>
<br>

{{BR}}
= OERs on the Topic =

<iframe> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructional_design </iframe>

<br>

{{BR}}
= Linked Learning Areas =

The essential learning areas in instructional design connect analysis, learning theory, outcomes, evidence, activities, media, accessibility, motivation, implementation, and evaluation. Use the navigation table to continue exploring related concepts.

{| align=center
{{:D-Tab}}
'''[[English:Instructional Design|Instructional Design]]'''
# [[English:Needs analysis|Needs analysis]]
# [[English:Learning objectives|Learning objectives]]
# [[English:ADDIE model|ADDIE model]]
# [[English:Backward design|Backward design]]
# [[English:Constructive alignment|Constructive alignment]]
# [[English:Formative assessment|Formative assessment]]
# [[English:Summative assessment|Summative assessment]]
# [[English:Universal Design for Learning|Universal Design for Learning]]
# [[English:Educational technology|Educational technology]]
# [[English:Learning analytics|Learning analytics]]
# [[English:Accessibility|Accessibility]]
# [[English:Evaluation|Evaluation]]
|}

{{BR}}
= aiMOOC Projects =
[[Category:English]]
[[Category:Instructional Design]]
[[Category:Education]]
[[Category:Educational Technology]]
[[Category:Higher Education]]
[[Category:Teaching and Learning]]
[[Category:Curriculum Design]]
[[Category:AI_MOOC]]
[[Category:GPT aiMOOC]]
{{MT}}

English:Instructional Design - Versionsgeschichte

Glanz: aiMOOC über GPT aiMOOC Action erstellt