Design Alchemy pp 143-160 | Cite as

How Does the Design Alchemist Practice?

  • Roderick Sims
Part of the Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations book series (ECTII, volume 8)


This chapter focuses on the five-step practice of Design Alchemy, which through a number of course development projects has proved practical, efficient, effective, flexible and sustainable. The individual steps will be familiar to those who are experienced designers, as they integrate essential elements of established design practice, even though their logical progression may present differently. The design process begins by defining the knowledge application, the knowledge and/or skills students will be able to apply on completion of the course. This is followed by the identification of learning outcomes and the assessment items which will manifest these outcomes, which are then aligned with the learning activities that produce the assessment items. The final step in the process involves linking the resources (subject matter or content) to the learning activities. The adoption of this practice has proved effective in terms of creating a complete course syllabus (excluding mandatory policies and institutional information), including the structure of the online environment, should that be part of the delivery environment.


Learning Activity Learning Outcome Learning Objective Iodine Concentration Assessment Item 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. American Registry of Radiologic Technologists. (2013). AART Certification. Available from Accessed October 12, 2013.
  2. Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., & Oliver, R. (2010). A guide to authentic e-learning. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Kearsley, G. (2009). Explorations in learning & instruction: The theory into practice database.
  4. Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Mager, R. (1975). Preparing instructional objectives (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Lake Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  6. Moore, C. (2008, May 12). Be an elearning action hero. Let’s save the world from boring training. Available from Accessed October 10, 2013.
  7. Ryder, M. (2013, March 10). Instructional design models. Available from Accessed October 10, 2013.
  8. Salmon, G. (2013). E-tivities: The key to active online learning (2nd ed.). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive conceptions of learning. Review of Educational Research, 56(4), 411–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Sims, R., Dobbs, G., & Hand, T. (2002). Enhancing quality in online learning: Scaffolding design and planning through proactive evaluation. Distance Education, 23(2), 135–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roderick Sims
    • 1
  1. 1.KnowledgecraftWoodbumAustralia

Personalised recommendations