This chapter presents an engaging discussion of the way that gamification and learning technology have developed over recent years, as well as examining some of the theoretical contestations in the field, mapping out avenues for future research and development, and providing clear advice for designers considering adopting gamified approaches. The chapter begins by defining the game and recognizing that gaming and gamification both have a long history. It notes that gamification is distinct from games, and uses Kapp’s (2012) discussion of the elements of gamification to discuss this. From that point, a conversation is developed about the need to design gamification in such a way so that is fit for its intended purpose. This leads into a discussion about how various learning theories, including behaviourism, and motivation theories, relate to gamification design. It notes the distinct advantages that have been lent to the development and adoption of gamification via mobile technology, and especially internet enabled devices. It will also recognize that some of the promises of gamification, especially as it relates to learning and instructional design, have failed to materialize. The chapter concludes with advice for designers to consider as they design their own gamification, including how they might leverage the most value on gamified resources. The chapter makes significant use of authentic examples and case studies drawn from a range of different industries and areas, thus ensuring that students of all backgrounds are able to access the material and apply it to their own experience.

In this chapter, we discuss fundamental principles that define a creative learning environment and how these can be integrated into pedagogical design. Utilizing research, a creative environment instrument, and diverse learning settings as a springboard, we emphasize the link between a learning environment’s design and how it nurtures creativity. We propose the use of the SCALE (Support for Creativity in a Learning Environment) instrument (Richardson & Mishra, 2018) as a frame for understanding and evaluating the characteristics of creative learning environments. Using the SCALE’s constructs—characteristics of the environment, learning climate, and learner engagement—as benchmarks, we consider how these offer criteria to build into the design of learning environments. We examine the theoretical underpinnings of creativity, creative environments, and learning, identifying gaps in classroom research that the SCALE instrument can bridge. This chapter discusses applications of these principles across various environments, including online and blended spaces, acknowledging that different environments present distinctive affordances, opportunities, constraints, and possibilities. Our implications take a future-oriented perspective on online creative learning environment design in both research and practice.

This chapter elucidates on learning experience design (LXD), a philosophical approach to instructional that draws from various perspectives including human-computer interaction and design thinking. LXD aims to guide the design and development of digital learning technologies, emphasizing on creating highly usable and satisfying digital learning experiences. The chapter outlines specific human-centered design techniques, their goals, and the ideal stage of application during the design and development of digital learning experiences.

This chapter addresses the methodological vacuum in evaluating LXD practices. It elucidates common evaluation methods for LXD, providing a structured approach amidst the existing challenges in terminology, theoretical foundation, and method-application from user experience design (UXD) in learning design contexts. This chapter aims to bridge the gap by offering methodological guidance, thus fostering a more robust framework for evaluating LXD initiatives.

Learning and instructional designers are increasingly required to make use of various forms of data and analytics in order to design, implement and evaluate interventions. This is largely due to the increase in data available to learning designers and learning analysts due the update of digital technologies as part of learning and training. This chapter examines the historical development of what has become known as learning analytics, defining the field and considering various models of learning analytics, including the process model with its focus on student learning. The chapter then explores the ways that learning analytics might be effectively connected to the field of learning design, and provides a number of examples of applications of this, including learning analytics dashboards, tailored messaging and feedback systems and writing analytics. Examples of these different applications are also presented and discussed. Finally, the chapter concludes with a consideration for he challenges and future directions for learning analytics.

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) research has become pervasive in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education over the last several decades. Guided by sociocultural and social constructivist theories of learning, CSCL focuses on shared meaning making and is influenced by the three pillars of CSCL: enabling technologies, pedagogical designs, and modes of collaboration. This chapter identifies four different approaches or clusters to CSCL that involve different combinations of these pillars. Focusing on two of these clusters, this chapter (a) identifies robust themes in this field and (b) discusses the positive outcomes associated with these aspects of CSCL. Outcomes include learning gains, process improvements, and affective outcomes. Across clusters, results demonstrate that scaffolding and feedback in different combinations affect outcomes. Moreover, different combinations are used with learners at different ages and with different learning goals. Designing CSCL for different learning environments requires considering the complex system of learning environments that emerge from the interaction among contexts, learner characteristics, and learning activities.

The field of learning and instructional design and technology (LIDT) has an important contribution to offer towards what Beckwith (1988) called “the transformation of learners and . . . learning” (p. 18). However, in pursuit of this mission, we have become too fixated on being designers and applying the methods of design thinking. As valuable as design is, it’s ultimately too narrow an approach to help us have the impact we desire because it overemphasizes the importance of the products and services we create. To be more influential, we need other approaches that focus our efforts on nurturing people’s “intrinsic talents and capacities” that are ultimately outside of our ability to manage and control (Thomson, 2005, p. 158; see also Biesta, 2013). In this chapter I first describe how design’s focus on creating and making misleads our understanding and application of important dimensions of our field. I then describe how we can cultivate an LIDT identity that is better suited for the aims we are pursuing. An LIDT-specific identity may include some methods from design thinking, but it will also encompass additional ways of improving the human condition. I end by calling on readers to consider what this important evolution for our field means for their personal practice.