Designed for Learning!

When Everything Is Lit

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Fri, 04 Sep 2026 16:56:29 +0000

Rijksmuseum Library - Photo by Taruna Goel

"Do you think museums should completely fill their walls with paintings?" That's the question that Rijksmuseum Instagram handle posted this AM.

The funny thing is, I have been thinking a lot about art galleries and museums. In fact, I was at Rijksmuseum this summer, and it's a beautiful museum.

But I wonder. Can something that is designed to be clear and beautiful actually end up being tiring to look at?

Have you been to art galleries or museums where almost every painting is spotlighted and has its own special corner that takes your attention? I have. Rooms of white walls where I can see everything clearly. But after 30 minutes of walking around and paying attention to every brightly lit part of the room, my eyes get exhausted. I am seeing things, but I can't appreciate the art anymore.

It's what my daughter, a Contemporary Arts grad, likes to call "feeling arted out".

When that happens, she recommends that I sit for some time, away from the art and the bright lights. Perhaps even in a dark(er) area where there are more shadows and where the walls aren't quite as white.

I call it my visual quiet zone. The visual relief where I can simply look without paying any attention.

I am looking for a written quiet zone these days because I am "feeling arted out" after reading post after post of AI-generated content.

I can't deny the clarity of writing. Ideas are packaged as neat, single, short sentences, and the layout of the article is one sentence at a time (but who thinks like that?). It's like a stream of complete, purposeful, independently meaningful series of words (aka punchlines). Yet, as a whole, there is nothing for me to take away. It's a template that feels all too familiar, and is frankly becoming mentally exhausting to process what I am reading. And not because the words or ideas are complicated, but because they are overly consistent and too uniform.

I am trying to reason why. Why is it crystal clear yet so muddy? I have a take. I think it's because AI-generated content is missing the rhythm and texture of human writing. The light and the dark corners where our eyes can rest, and our brains can shut off.

We are messy in the ways we think and write. When I write, some ideas are powerful, and hopefully, those sentences stick with you, but most other sentences are like fillers. They don't give any new ideas or say anything too dramatic, but simply build on the main ideas. There is an interplay of good writing combined with not-so-good writing (even if unintentional). It adds to the contrast and the variation that I expect when reading or listening to another human. Part of the human charm, I think. I should mention that I am not a fan of mistakes in human writing. So, I don't advocate adding imperfections to writing just to sound human. But I do appreciate the evidence of human thinking behind what's written or being read.

But with AI-generated content, where everything reads so perfectly, and every sentence is a main idea, it reminds me of the struggle of reading a page of text, all formatted in bold.

Or walking around museums that completely fill their walls with paintings.

I need a written quiet zone.

When Producing the Thing Is No Longer Proof of Competence

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Fri, 28 Aug 2026 12:55:00 +0000

Harvard psychologist and education professor Howard Gardner recently shared his view on how AI could change education. He believes cognitive tasks will become optional for humans, freeing people to pursue their interests. The actual interview between Rick Hess and Howard Gardner is certainly more nuanced than just the statement and makes for an interesting read.

https://www.edweek.org/technology/opinion-howard-gardner-how-ai-will-force-us-to-rethink-education/2026/08

While I can't say I agree with his bold statement of cognitive tasks becoming optional for humans, what is true is that when all our lives, humans have defined their intelligence based on cognitive tasks, and then, AI takes over some of those cognitive tasks, we are suddenly left thinking more deeply about what we thought was exclusive to us... our intelligence!

But I think the real leap in this discussion is to stop making these lists of "things human can do that AI can't" (because, realistically, that list is shrinking by the hour). The more important task is to start questioning systems that were designed with the assumption that producing something is the way to demonstrate intelligence. I mean systems of education, training, assessment in school and at work that rely on writing an essay, submitting a portfolio, completing a presentation slide deck, making a report, etc.

In L&D, we have always done this. We use course completion, knowledge tests, work samples and portfolios as evidence that learning has occurred or that someone is ready to perform. But we know all too well that completing training isn't the same as being able to perform at work, just like producing the right answer isn't necessarily evidence of understanding.

The artefact was never the actual competency yet we believed for so long that it was. But when the artefact can be produced by AI, it becomes an even weaker proxy for learning, intelligence, and competence.

Having worked in the areas of competency development and assessment for close to 3 decades, I know too well that competence is messy. It involves recognizing what is happening, deciding what matters, and applying information in various contexts. Then there is exercising judgment, adapting when circumstances change and taking responsibility for the outcome. The artifact may provide useful evidence of those things, but it isn't 'the thing' itself.

The artefact as the evidence of intelligence is losing ground quickly. Especially given the recent development of AI watermarking, where Anthropic has begun watermarking text generated by Claude so that the content can be machine-identified as AI-generated.

So, where does the value of expertise sit when AI can produce so much of the work we have traditionally been paid to produce? We are all realizing what was always true but hidden in plain sight that expertise is beyond outputs and is generally more upstream.

In my field of instructional design, this is becoming increasingly obvious. AI can produce storyboards, graphics, video, narration, activities and assessments. It can turn a reasonably well-defined brief into a fairly complete learning product very quickly.

What is the value of an instructional designer? I don't think the answer is simply "in knowing how to use AI." I think it is increasingly in everything that happens before we ask AI to produce something.

I am glad I work with clients and teams who get this. I am currently working on an organization-wide performance improvement initiative where we are taking an end-to-end approach to needs analysis, looking carefully at the system rather than responding to a request for training. We are examining the work, people, processes, tools, expectations, resources and environment, and working through the findings collaboratively. We are so focused on not hurrying towards the output and it is taking some discipline and intention to do it this way. I mean, when we can produce learning in minutes, it is rather tempting to start producing! But the more capable the tool, the more important is the role of the human to spend time figuring out what actually needs to be produced.

Because AI makes the “doing” easier, the value of human capability is more upstream in knowing what to ask, what to pursue and why it matters.

Perhaps we need to get much better at assessing the things that are harder to produce on demand and are certainly harder to outsource to AI.

Perhaps we have to redefine what now constitutes human intelligence and what makes us competent.

Perhaps it is about things like understanding the context, tapping into the lived experience, human judgment, and being responsible and accountable for our choices and actions.

This binary view of AI vs. Human just won't cut it anymore. This isn't as simple as AI on one side and human expertise on the other. The opportunity staring at us is in knowing how to combine the two. The shift from producing answers to identifying what problems to solve is the real discussion. Not the how but the why.

But it was always about the why, wasn't it?

I Had Fun. But Am I Ready to Do It Again?

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Thu, 09 Jul 2026 16:49:43 +0000

Author's First Attempt at Lino Cut Printing

Storytime! This past weekend, I took a beginner-level, three-hour lino cut printing workshop.

The instructor was an experienced printmaker who shared some beautiful examples of her work and gave a brief demonstration before we got started.

Our project? A reduction lino print.

If you know anything about lino printing, you will know that a reduction print is not exactly the simplest place to begin. Of course, when I started the workshop, I did not know this :)

News flash! I had never seen or used lino blocks, carving tools, or basic printing equipment before. But it was a beginner-level workshop, right? We were asked to draw something simple on paper, transfer it to the lino block, and then carve four different layers that would allow for four different colours to be printed. I was not sure what I was getting into...but I had fun, and I got some multi-colour prints to prove it!

The lino print workshop certainly made for an experience. I discovered how awkward it feels to hold the carving tools, how tough it is to carve tiny details or curvy lines, how easy it is to remove too much material, but how satisfying it is to pull one decent-looking print while attempting to have 10+ options! The workshop created good conditions for exploration, and I became familiar with some things.

For a beginner's workshop, it had plenty of challenges. Fifteen of us were all trying to create our first print, and one instructor was trying to walk around the room, respond to our questions (if we asked), troubleshoot problems (individually), and keep everyone moving. I loved being challenged. And as a trainer and facilitator, I know and appreciate how struggle is often where learning happens. But as much as I loved the challenge, I was also frustrated in the moments between the struggles.

When my print did not turn out as expected, I wanted to understand why. Was the pressure wrong? Was there too much or too little ink? Was the roller not coated well or did it have too much ink? Was my carving technique the problem? Was my paper placement incorrect? Did I not use the right tip to carve the lino? I couldn't figure out what all was going wrong! I had too many questions!

After the workshop, I found myself asking myself, What did I actually learn? And more importantly, could I do it again on my own? What would I intentionally do differently next time?

I can't say that I didn't learn anything! I learned plenty. But it was not the kind of learning that would allow me to independently tackle another lino cut print tomorrow.

My mistakes taught me that carving lino requires patience, planning, and a very different way of thinking about creating an image. After I saw the prints, I realized I had to think about positive and negative spaces before I even started carving. I also learned the hard way that mistakes are easy to make and impossible to undo once you have carved the lino :)

Soon enough, the instructional designer and trainer in me took over. I left asking myself what if, before I did anything with a lino block, I had received some orientation around some big ideas about lino cutting and printing? Perhaps, even provided with a simpler drawing for beginners? Or instead of starting with a reduction linocut print, what if we started with a basic, single-layer carving print and then moved to multiple layers and multiple colours?

The questions made me think about how sometimes it is easy to confuse an interactive and fun experience with learning, especially for beginners.

As someone who works in learning and development, I suspect this resonates with a broader issue we have all seen in workplace learning.

We often celebrate fun and interaction and plan and design for it. At the end of the workshop, we ask whether participants enjoyed it, whether they were involved, and whether they stayed interested. Yes, fun counts. However…

Having an interactive and fun experience is not the same as learning in a way that transfers to future performance.

At the end of the workshop, I was left thinking about what knowledge, skills, or insights I will carry into my next attempt. What principles have I extracted from the experience that I can apply? I know that my questions were getting at learning transfer, not just participation.

Because...

Learning isn't simply about what happened during an activity; it's what happens after it, or rather what changes because of it.

Moving the Needle with RPL: How the language of RPL is a Strategic Lever

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Wed, 10 Jun 2026 17:10:00 +0000

Published on the occasion of the first CAPLA International Day of Recognition, 09 June 2026

"Moving the RPL Needle" by Taruna Goel, Slide 13, CAPLA Conference Presentation

For years, I believed that if I could just explain RPL clearly enough, the process, the rigour, the evidence requirements, everyone would see its value. I was wrong. Not about RPL's value but about what "clearly" actually means to different people.

The VU Meter Problem

The expression "move the needle" comes from analog VU meters used in sound recording. If the sound was too quiet, the needle simply didn't move, nothing was registered even though recording was technically happening. The sound had to be loud enough, and in the right frequency range, for it to register.

Across Canada and around the world, we are doing high-quality, rigorous, impactful recognition work. But if the language we use doesn't resonate with the systems and key players we are speaking to, the needle may not move. Our message won't be loud enough to register. And when nothing is registered, even important work becomes invisible.

One Practice, Different Conversations

One of the occupational hazards of working in RPL is that we become very attached to our own terminology :) Terms like prior learning assessment, portfolio review, challenge process, and credit assessment all make sense to those of us who live in this field. But these terms describe the mechanism, not the value. And people don't engage with mechanisms, they engage with outcomes that align with their needs.

After nearly three decades working at the intersection of adult learning, competency recognition, and workforce development, I have come to understand that the RPL ecosystem has several distinct audiences. While there are genuine areas of overlap, most players care about quality, credibility, and outcomes, each one is primarily listening through the lens of their own priorities and needs.

Learners and Candidates are not asking "How rigorous is the assessment?" They are asking: "Does my experience count? Can I skip what I already know? Will this help me get where I'm going faster?" Candidates are listening for signals that their existing knowledge, skills, and experience are recognized and valued. They use emotionally charged language, recognition, validation, confidence, opportunity, belonging. They talk about being seen. What resonates most with this group is language about progress and momentum, not process and protocol. When we lead with evidence requirements or assessment procedures, we may be communicating accurately but we are not communicating value from the learner's perspective.
Post-Secondary Institutions are listening through a lens of quality assurance and academic integrity. When RPL is framed as an exception, it creates resistance. When it is framed as a structured assessment process that measures achievement of the same learning outcomes expected of all students, just through a different pathway, the conversation shifts from risk to rigour. The question they are really asking is: "How do we maintain standards while creating flexible pathways?"
Employers and Industry generally don't wake up thinking about RPL. They think about workforce capability. Words like credit equivalency and advanced standing carry little weight in an industry context. What resonates is time-to-competence, reduced retraining, and confidence that skills have been verified. The employer question is: "How quickly can this person contribute, and how confident can we be in their competency?" I have seen employer engagement increase dramatically when RPL is described as a way to confirm what workers already know and can do rather than as an academic exercise.
Government and Regulatory Bodies operate at a systems level. They are not primarily focused on individual advancement or organizational productivity. Their concern is whether the recognition system is fair, consistent, transparent, and defensible and how it impacts the labour market and economic growth. RPL gains traction at this level when it is framed as a system-level enabler: improving workforce responsiveness, supporting labour mobility, advancing equity, and increasing the efficiency of public training investments. The question they are asking is: "Can this system be trusted to produce consistent, defensible outcomes?"

We Are Translators of Value

Here is the insight that has most changed how I approach this work. We are not actually changing the RPL practice from one audience to another, we are translating its value proposition. The assessment methodology, the evidence standards, the quality frameworks, these remain the same. What shifts is the language we use to make that value visible to each player.

When we rely on one-size-fits-all RPL language, we almost always miss somebody. It can sound too academic in workforce contexts, too operational in academic ones, and too abstract in policy conversations. This doesn't mean the practice lacks value. It means its value hasn't been translated.

Most successful RPL initiatives are not necessarily those with the most sophisticated assessment tools or the most comprehensive policies. They are often the ones that have become intentionally fluent in the right language for each audience.

They know that (mostly):

Learners are listening for opportunity and progress
Institutions are listening for academic integrity and learning pathways
Employers are listening for skills validation and job readiness
Regulators are listening for standards and defensibility

When we communicate through those different lenses, the conversation shifts from explaining the process to demonstrating the value.

To become an effective RPL Practitioner, we have to become translators of value, not just administrators of process.

Final Thoughts

As I was preparing this session for CAPLA's first International Day of Recognition, I found myself sitting with a question and I want to leave it with you too.

If your RPL practice disappeared tomorrow, who would notice? Would employers notice? Would learners? Would institutions? Would policymakers?

And perhaps more importantly, would they have the language to explain what went missing?

As skills shortages deepen, career pathways become less linear, and learning increasingly happens outside formal educational settings, the need for trusted recognition systems will only grow.

The opportunity before us is not simply to improve our RPL assessment practices. It is to build recognition systems that are understood, trusted, and valued across the entire ecosystem. And that starts with using the right language.

Taruna Goel is an RPL Strategist with North Pacific Metrics in Vancouver, Canada, and a recognized expert in competency assessment, prior learning recognition, and workforce credentialing. This article is adapted from her session presented at CAPLA's inaugural International Day of Recognition on June 09, 2026.

Connect on LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/tarunagoel

#RPL #PLAR #RecognitionOfPriorLearning #CAPLA #SkillsRecognition #LifelongLearning #WorkforceDevelopment #InternationalDayOfRecognition

Writing That Matters

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Wed, 20 May 2026 21:42:00 +0000

Handwritten notes from a conference attended by the author.
The messy, human beginning of a published blog post.

I have been writing my blog since 2008 and with over 200 posts, my writing process is sacrosanct to me. Writing is not only one of my hobbies, it is also essentially something that contributes deeply to my sense of self. It is a core activity that helps me make sense of my experiences, my work, and my reflections. I value the process of writing as much as the output.

Even though my blog posts may appear finished, I have developed an internal capacity to make space for ambiguity where I am still making space for unresolved thoughts. There is also an evolution of sorts or a continuity of sense-making over the last two decades.

The process of writing has given me many opportunities to reflect on my biases, assumptions, contradictions and values. For me writing is not purely for information, it is also for critique, judgement, reflection and growth.

Writing is meaningful for me because I enjoy working through the ambiguity and unresolved thoughts. I am okay with sitting with the unfinished and very appreciative of the wrestle that gets me to the finish line.

I do wonder about how a lot of writing is being produced today, what kind of writing still requires a human, what kind of writing still matters.

---

"Writing that matters will be writing that can still function as evidence of human deliberation." - James O’Sullivan

More: https://psyche.co/ideas/well-soon-find-out-what-is-truly-special-about-human-writing

"Writing isn’t just the production of sentences – it’s the training of endurance by way of sustained attention. It’s a way of learning what one thinks by attempting to say it. An LLM can reproduce the appearance of that activity, but it can’t replace it, because the value lies not only in the object produced but in the transformation that occurs during its making." - Micah Nathan, an MIT writing professor on his students using AI

More: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/10/fiction-writing-professor-ai

"Cognitive ownership lives in the process of making the thing, in the wrestle that happens before the piece is finished. It is what you accumulate when you struggle with a sentence, choose the wrong word, change your mind, and end up somewhere you did not expect to be. It is the residue of having been there. You can produce a polished piece of work without it, and you can produce a flawed piece of work that is saturated with it, and the difference between the two is invisible until someone asks you a question and you have to answer from inside the thinking." - Yen Anderson on AI-assisted work and the ownership we are losing without noticing

More: https://yenanderson.substack.com/p/the-author-was-absent

"More generally, the impact of AI on learning, motivation, and meaning may differ depending on the stage of life or career. Individuals in later stages of life—who have already developed the skills to persevere through difficulty, learn from failure, and find meaning in their work—can benefit from using AI to save time, conserve resources, and enhance output. For them, AI functions as a supplement rather than a substitute. By contrast, individuals in earlier developmental stages risk bypassing the very experiences that build these foundational skills. Just as students are still asked to “show their work” even when calculators exist, younger learners need to struggle, reason, and revise through the full process before they can benefit from shortcuts."

More: https://www.nature.com/articles/s44271-026-00402-1

CredX2026: Making Recognition a Verb

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Tue, 28 Apr 2026 20:11:14 +0000

Voices from CredX2026 - Word Cloud by Taruna Goel

Over the last two weeks, I have been reflecting on my experience at CredX2026 and trying to make sense of it all in terms of what was said, what I heard, what we discussed, and what needs to be done next.

A core part of my work sits at the intersection of systems that do not always speak the same language, yet are all working toward shared outcomes around competence, credentials, and workforce mobility. I am talking about industry, post-secondary, and government. CredX2026 brought all of these systems and people into the same room.

As we intermingled, it made me realize how the challenge is not just about translating across these systems. It is about building trust between them.

As Chad Doerksen from the Ministry of Post-Secondary Education and Future Skills shared at our table, “credentials are a proxy for trust.” If that is true, then Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) is not simply an assessment mechanism or an alternative pathway to credentials. It is a way of making trust visible, portable, defensible, and valuable.

Which is why Julie Klein’s framing of “recognition as a verb” stayed with me. It shifts RPL from being a static system or policy into something active, relational, and ongoing, It is something we do constantly and intentionally, not something we design once and implement.

As I listened across sessions and conversations, I was struck by how much innovation already exists in the system. Jako Olivier from the Commonwealth of Learning presented the microcredential framework already working across the commonwealth but also reminded us that "while we call them microcredentials, there is nothing micro about the work", especially when situated within a broader lifelong learning context. Robert Luke from eCampus Ontario pointed to the growing importance of making skills visible through tools like Skills Finder and LMI-enabled curriculum stacks. Susan Forseille from Thompson Rivers University highlighted both the scale of PLAR in practice and future-facing ideas such as a provincial credit bank, along with important work on decolonizing and Indigenizing assessment methodologies. Sonia Hall from the Ministry of Social Development and Poverty Reduction shared BC’s current initiatives, policies, and regional innovations in credentialing.

And yet, alongside all this progress, there was a quiet but persistent tension. Jackie Pichette from RBC Thought Leadership captured it well: “Change often starts at the margins. The problem is when it stays there.” RPL, microcredentials, and work-integrated learning are no longer fringe ideas, and yet they are still not fully embedded in how systems operate. As Jeremy McQuigge noted, it is time we reclaim these invisible systems. Because the challenge now is less about innovation and more about integration.

That tension becomes even sharper when viewed through current labour market realities. Tricia Williams, Future Skills framed the challenge within the realities of mid‑career disruption due to automation. Jeff Griffiths, leading the Alberta Talent Pipeline Management Initiative, noted that the system itself has changed, that the lack of entry-level jobs is a structural issue and how "we cannot credential our way out of it". At the same time, Rob Goehring from AI in BC observed, how skills are decaying faster than degrees are being updated. Nan Travers from Credential As You Go added another layer, reminding us that the quality and value of a credential are experienced differently by learners and institutions, and that while "AI may help us achieve efficiencies, we must remain intentional about effectiveness".

In that context, RPL begins to look less like an alternative pathway and more like essential infrastructure. A big part of that infrastructure is the "language of competencies" and the value of engaging industry extensively, not peripherally as highlighted by Dan McFaull. Margo Griffiths spoke about how behind every trusted credential is the data standard, governance and interoperability infrastructure. But the infrastructure here is not just technical; it is deeply relational. Jennifer Beale and Katie Fitzmaurice from Invest Vancouver spoke about the importance of “relational infrastructure” and the role of "neutral conveners in connecting systems". Joanna Jagger from WORTH Association emphasized “community over credentials,” while Darion from Teqare and Lynn White from ACCESS highlighted the value of empowering communities through training, achievement and self-sufficiency. Jodi Tavares from MyCreds Network reminded us that a "healthy ecosystem is connected, not competitive, and must remain focused on the mobility of the credential holder".

These are not just ideas; they are conditions required for trust to exist and scale.

Throughout the two days, I found myself returning to the book, Thinking, Fast and Slow. Much of the world around us is pushing us into fast, reactive thinking. We are reacting to AI, economic shifts, and global uncertainty. But CredX2026 created space for something different. It provide space to think about and share ideas for a slower, more deliberate, and more collaborative response rather than simply another reaction. And that shift in pace felt important, because systems change does not happen at the speed of reaction; it happens at the speed of alignment.

Which brings me to what feels like the most important takeaway. If recognition is truly a verb, if it is about continuously validating and translating learning across contexts, then we need to normalize it. David Porter’s call to “make RPL normal” may sound simple, but it carries tremendous weight. It challenges us to move beyond pilots and pockets of innovation toward something more embedded and systemic. We need to understand that RPL is not an exception or a shortcut. Recognition is simply about creating pathways that meet people where they are, not where the system expects them to start.

In a system where skills are changing faster than credentials, and where industry, post-secondary, and government are all working toward shared outcomes, RPL is no longer an “alternative pathway."

This feels like a real opportunity particularly here in British Columbia for us to move from conversation to coordination. We are doing important work across sectors, but too often in parallel. Gregory W. Stone from BC Colleges noted how opportunities exist to re-vision and re-purpose what we have and how the most important question is "What is going to happen next?"

Here's my call to action that I want to advocate for, support and be a part of:

The good? Industry, post-secondary, and government are all solving the same problem.

The what can be better? We just are not solving it together yet.

There is space for a cross-system RPL Community of Practice that brings together employers, post-secondary institutions, government, and other intermediaries (neutral conveners) for ongoing dialogue grounded in practice. So, not just to participate in conferences to share ideas, but to work together to build a shared language, toolkits and guidelines, competency frameworks and recognition-based credentialing models.

I am imagining a kind of a living network of practitioners and partners, of people and institutions, who are actively engaged in this work so that the connections transcend beyond LinkedIn and conferences like CredX into real work, pilots, shared projects and cross-system collaboration. That is what will help move credentials, recognition and validation from the margins to the centre.

Thanks to all the speakers, and to Tannis Morgan Adrian Lipsett, Erin, Hal and team, BCcampus Tracy Roberts Britt Dzioba, M.Ed. Helena Prins Gwen Nguyen Kelsey Kilbey, Future Skills Centre and the rest of the #CredX2026 team.

CredX2026 helped frame this important work and I hope we can move beyond episodic conversations and toward something more sustained.

I went into CredX2026 thinking about credentials. I left thinking about recognition and trust.

Recognition is not just a process. Not just a noun. It is a verb. Recognition is how trust moves across systems.

Lifelong Unlearning

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Mon, 27 Apr 2026 18:48:00 +0000

I was talking to a colleague the other day and we were discussing how our formal systems always assume that learning is additive. We are always talking about more courses, more skills, more knowledge. But in practice, growth also comes from subtracting. Anyone who has worked hard to drop a bad habit knows how tough it is to let go. Whether it is a habit, our assumptions and biases, or even poor work practices and ways of working, "unlearning" is hard to do but has nothing to show. There is no concrete evidence of unlearning or any artifacts or portfolio to show what and how much we have unlearned. We don't give out certificates for what people have stopped doing!

Unlearning is subtle, but it is powerful. After unlearning my fair share, I know that it has made space for better judgment, greater adaptability, and more thoughtful practice.

I wrote about this previously, in 2012, in my blog post titled:
Emptying Your Cup: Unlearning to Learn.

The point I am making is that not all growth comes from learning something new. Sometimes, it comes from letting something go. And we have to be intentional about it.

What did you let go of recently that contributed to your growth? How do you encourage others to unlearn? How do we design "learning" systems that also enable and support unlearning?

Thoughts?

----------

Additional reading:

Chapter 15: Learning, relearning and unlearning

November 2024 Open Books and Proceedings
DOI:10.38140/obp1-2024-15
License CC BY 4.0
Authors:
Rosemary Akinyi Menya-Olendo
Lucy Mawang
Kenyatta University

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387466020_Chapter_15_Learning_relearning_and_unlearning

In this chapter, the authors describe the following key terms:

Learning is contextualised as the continuous ability to acquire competencies relevant for the 21st century. This form of learning enables people to continuously improve their performance, expand their horizons, and equip themselves for the future. It further allows individuals to grow and develop personally and professionally throughout their lifespan. Turk (2023) observes that this type of learning occurs in various contexts, such as formal education, informal learning, and experiential learning.

Unlearning means leaving behind old, outdated, and obsolete knowledge that is deemed inefficient in ad-dressing current challenges. It therefore entails questioning one’s assumptions and beliefs, and opening up to new perspectives that can help solve present problems. No wonder Turk (2023) postulates that the unlearning process may be challenging, as it necessitates confronting personal biases and preconceptions.

Relearning is the process of learning something again, often in a new or different way. It involves building on previous knowledge and experiences to gain a deeper understanding of a subject or skill. Relearning is important because it allows individuals to update their knowledge and skills in response to new information and changing circumstances (Turk, 2023).

It turns out that unlearning isn't just a human challenge. AI and LLMs are wrestling with the same problem. A paper submitted to ICLR 2026, Lifelong Unlearning for Multimodal Large Language Models (Li et al.), tackles the problem of teaching AI systems to selectively forget outdated or problematic information.

"Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are trained on massive multimodal data, making data unlearning increasingly important as data owners may request the removal of specific content. In practice, these requests often arrive sequentially over time, creating the problem of MLLM Lifelong Unlearning."

Lessons from the Far Side of the Moon

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Tue, 14 Apr 2026 14:30:00 +0000

“human in the loop”

I am sure you have seen and heard this phrase that has become almost a default in conversations about AI and work. I have been thinking about it for months. It is supposed to be a reassuring phrase. That, in everything that AI is taking over, humans are still somewhere in the system overseeing, validating, and intervening when needed. But in the last few weeks, the more I have mulled over this phrase, the less reassured I have felt.

But something shifted last week.

Image credit: NASA

Seen during Artemis II’s lunar flyby on April 6, 2026, the Moon and Earth align in the same frame, each partially illuminated by the Sun.

On April 10, 2026, four astronauts completed a mission to fly around the far side of the Moon. They went further from Earth than any humans in over 50 years. On their way back, for about 40 minutes, they were completely cut off from NASA mission control.

There was no signal and no loop; it was all human.

While I am not a 100% sure, I bet the team at NASA focused a lot on how to build and nurture the competencies of the four astronauts for this 40-minute blackout when the Orion module would be cut off entirely. All these efforts would be in preparing the humans to respond to unknown and unpredictable situations and trusting that the humans inside the spacecraft will know what to do.

Image credit: NASA

The Artemis II crew – (clockwise from left) Mission Specialist Christina Koch, Mission Specialist Jeremy Hansen, Commander Reid Wiseman, and Pilot Victor Glover – pause for a group photo inside the Orion spacecraft on their way home.

NASA did not send AI to the Moon, they sent humans because fundamentally, there are many things where humans are not just meant to be in the loop, they are meant to be in the lead. I was reassured by such a mission where humans were not just a checkpoint or validation point in the system, instead they were the ones leading the design and the decisions. And if you have seen all the pictures and the beautiful, poetic expressions of the astronauts trying to reflect on what they were seeing and feeling and learning, you will agree that humans are not just validators; we are value creators.

It was Accenture CEO Julie Sweet who said, "AI future should be human in the lead", and I love this reframing. This difference between loop and lead is not a subtle one. It is a powerful way to think about how organizations must use AI, but not at the expense of losing their own ability to think, learn, grow, and become more intelligent.

When an organization like NASA sends humans to space through missions like Artemis II, it is not because machines are incapable. It is because, in environments where there is ambiguity and uncertainty and the consequences are as real as it gets, we can't afford to outsource our judgement.

So, as AI is reshaping our work and our world, instead of thinking about whether or not we keep humans in the loop, we have to think more intentionally about how to keep humans in the lead! This means thinking about how we design roles, systems, training and work so that humans continue to build their capability and thinking and they continue to feel and express and to question and engage with each other.

I have said this before. I don't think the real risk of AI is replacement. I think it is the erasure of our unique fingerprints. It is the things that each of us leaves behind as breadcrumbs that highlight the mix of who we are through our choices, decisions, and connections with other humans.

In the race to AGI, if we focus only on making AI more intelligent, we may end up designing systems and organizations that make us less intelligent. Which also means that perhaps the real work ahead is not just building smarter AI, but redefining human intelligence itself.

Learning and Development in the New World

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Tue, 03 Mar 2026 19:27:00 +0000

I finally read Donald H Taylor's L&D Global Sentiment Survey (GSS) 2026 report last week, and I haven't been able to put it down. No, it didn't have all the answers but what it did say confirmed something that I have been watching build for years.

Donald calls it the “New World”.

For me, the most striking data point in the entire report was that the word "human" appeared in 64 challenge responses this year for example in comments like: “how to properly utilize AI while not removing the human element”. The word human didn't appear at all in 2022 or 2023.

Donald's read on this: "On the surface, this comment is about design, but it could also be about something more profound: about L&D's very sense of identity coming under threat from AI." (p.21).

I think that's exactly right.

Donald notes that "The biggest riser this year is 'Showing value', up from #7 last year to #5 this year, with its highest-ever share of the vote. Anecdotally, it seems L&D is feeling the pressure to justify its existence."

Yes. We don't have a technology or AI problem; we have an existential problem about who L&D is and what our role is in this New World.

Donald frames L&D's new role as "a shift from content creation to performance consulting, from training delivery to capability ecosystems, and from reactive service to proactive partnership" (p.17)

I agree. But I don't think this shift will happen through better technology or more AI. Instead, it will happen through bringing even more humanity into our work.
I think the shift is contingent on L&D practitioners who know their craft deeply enough to make it human, visible, and connected to outcomes that matter to the business.

The survey's conclusion lands on a note of cautious optimism: "while we have no map, we do have a direction." (p.22)

Yes, we may have a New World and perhaps the directions to get there may look somewhat intriguing. But after 25+ years in this field working at the intersection of workforce development, competency assessment, and learning design across industry sectors, I can say that the destination for L&D has always been the same.

Does the worker know more, perform better, and contribute more fully as a result of what L&D did? Everything else is just the method we chose to get there.

The GSS 2026 report is available at https://donaldhtaylor.co.uk/research_base/global-sentiment-survey-2026/

Well worth your time.

#LearningAndDevelopment #WorkplaceLearning #TalentDevelopment #GSS2026 #HumanFirst #PerformanceConsulting #FutureOfWork

RPL: Where Rigour Meets Relationships

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Wed, 18 Feb 2026 19:11:00 +0000

Image by DAMIAN NIOLET from Pixabay

This week, I read an article that really resonated with me, and I say that as someone who has spent more than two decades designing and implementing learning and RPL/PLAR (Recognition of Prior Learning) systems internationally and across multiple Canadian industry sectors.

"The Art and Science of Facilitating RPL – Why recognition is a craft; not a checkbox"
https://hbta.edu.au/the-art-and-science-of-facilitating-rpl/

Vanessa Solomon articulates here something that many of us in this field have observed and felt. RPL is fundamentally a practice that requires empathy, critical thinking and professional judgment, not just a mechanical exercise in evidence mapping.

The framing of RPL as an interplay between art and science is useful because it allows us to think more about how much of the RPL practice is an act of facilitation, coaching and mentoring beyond knowing the technical standards, reviewing the evidence criteria and mapping competencies to credits. The instructional designer in me was genuinely chuffed to see a nod to Marzano and using instructional design theory to elevate RPL as a discipline rather than simply a process.

I have worked across so many sectors from early childhood education to automotive trades to the digital economy and have found that if we only focus on the rigour without any relationship, we get compliance but no advocacy. If we only build relationships without much rigour, we get paper credentials that are not valued. To get to meaningful recognition, we need both rigour and relationships.

Where I'd like to push this further is the focus on the system. How do we build RPL tools, processes, and assessor support structures that help us strike the right balance between rigour and relationship, between art and science? A lot of good RPL work is more upstream than we imagine. I am talking about how competencies are drafted, communicated and 'lived in' by the sector. I am also thinking about the quality principles for the design of assessment tools and processes to be inclusive and usable.

Those caveats aside, I'd love for Vanessa's article to be read widely and for people to hear the point that she makes referring to "Marzano’s core insight: that effective professional practice is never purely technical or purely relational, it is both."

Full article by Vanessa Solomon at HBTA:
The Art and Science of Facilitating RPL – Why recognition is a craft; not a checkbox https://hbta.edu.au/the-art-and-science-of-facilitating-rpl/ #RPL #PLAR #VPL #Recognition #PriorLearning #RecognitionOfPriorLearning #Skills #LifelongSkills #WorkforceDevelopment #Validation #SkillsDevelopment

Recognition Begins with Learning

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Fri, 30 Jan 2026 18:08:00 +0000

Photo by Taruna Goel

One of the most significant learning experiences of my life has never appeared on my résumé, even though it demanded problem-solving, cultural fluency, resilience, adaptability, and continuous learning. When I immigrated to Canada in 2011, I gained no formal credentials for what I learned along the way. My informal learning became visible and transferable only through reflection and dialogue. Once I recognized my learning, it found expression through volunteer work with immigrant-serving organizations, where I supported others navigating similar transitions.

After more than 25 years in Learning & Development, one consistent lesson from my practice is that our systems rarely capture the many ways adults learn.

Learning is neither linear nor tidy. We learn by solving problems, navigating new spaces, making mistakes, and receiving feedback. This learning is real and tied to identity and contribution, yet it’s often invisible. Much adult learning can be tacit and embodied, and it doesn’t come with a transcript. Adults also struggle to name their learning because it doesn’t feel legitimate unless it occurs in a formal course. Surfacing this internalized learning requires agency, confidence, and guided reflection.

Competencies help make this learning visible and translate it into something observable and measurable by capturing the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and context. Through my work across sectors including career development, early childhood education, digital and IT, automotive, and construction, I have designed and applied competency frameworks to support clearer articulation of learning and performance standards.

Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) enables individuals to see the value of their learning while giving universities/industries a trusted way to acknowledge competence. Instead of forcing everyone through a single gate, RPL opens multiple doors by recognizing that learning happens in diverse and valuable ways: on the job, in the community, and in living life.

When engaging in the RPL process, it is important to note that experience alone does not guarantee learning. Neither do the years working in a role nor the job titles. What matters is how we engage with and reflect on the experience to surface the learning.

This is why RPL is called recognition of prior learning, and not recognition of prior experience, because it is the learning that counts, not merely having had the experience. And this intersection of learning and experience is where my practice is grounded, supporting individuals to translate lived experience into articulated, valued learning.

This article was originally published as a Spotlight feature in the Nova Scotia Career Development Association (NSCDA) members-only newsletter, Issue 2, January 2026.

(I was recently invited to write a feature article for the Nova Scotia Career Development Association's (NSCDA) RPL newsletter, RPL in Nova Scotia: Here to Stay (Issue 2, January 2026). Using my own immigration journey as a starting point, this article looks at how adult learning often remains invisible within formal systems. It highlights the role of Recognition of Prior Learning in bridging learning, lived experience, and credible recognition. Sharing it here for colleagues working in RPL, PLAR, workforce development, and skills recognition.)

hashtagRPL hashtagPLAR hashtagVPL hashtagRecognition hashtagPriorLearning hashtagSkills hashtagLifelongSkills hashtagWorkforceDevelopment hashtagValidation hashtagSkillsDevelopment

Additional Resources:

What Does Competency Mean? https://hrmhandbook.com/hrm/skills-competencies/meaning-definition/

eCampusOntario “The Open Competency Toolkit”: https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/competencytoolkit/

CAEL - Competency-Based Education and Credit for Prior Learning: https://www.cael.org/hubfs/C-BEN%20CAEL%204-pager_2022.pdf

PLA and Competency-Based Education: Friends? Family? Or Only Acquaintances?: https://www.plaio.org/index.php/home/article/view/206/236

Experience Alone Does Not Guarantee Learning: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/experience-alone-does-guarantee-learning-taruna-goel-rhftc/

Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL/PLAR) is Opening Doors for Many: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/recognition-prior-learning-rplplar-opening-doors-many-taruna-goel-v4ajc/

Recognize Before You Retrain: ‘Work Fingerprints’ (Podcast): https://www.linkedin.com/posts/shvetamalhan_futureofwork-rpl-humanskills-activity-7408514632035889153-7gkb

Looking Back, Moving Forward

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Wed, 31 Dec 2025 21:11:00 +0000

As the year comes to a close, I have been reflecting about the people, the ideas and the conversations that stayed with me throughout 2025.

Competencies and Recognition of Learning

This year, much of my focus was anchored in recognition of prior learning, developing and assessing competencies, and valuing lived experience whether through training needs, environmental scans or RPL and competency-based assessment pathways. Some highlights include:

RPL-Based National Certification Program (Canada): Designed, developed and launched a Recognition of Prior Learning-based certification for Career Development professionals. Awarded Professional Certification Programme of the Year by the e-Assessment Association.
Training Needs Analysis: Reviewed and analyzed structures, curriculum, and training model to define the current state; led consultations to define the desired state; conducted gap analysis with best practices and EDI considerations; and delivered actionable curriculum enhancement recommendations.
Competency-Based Faculty Development Program: Designed a structured yet flexible Faculty Development Program to build foundational skills in teaching, curriculum design, facilitation, and educational technology while advancing equity, diversity, inclusion, and Indigenous ways of knowing. The goal: support faculty growth from basic to advanced levels to enhance the quality of teaching and learning across the institution and cultivate a culture of teaching excellence and innovation.
Environmental Scan on Recognizing RPL Practitioners: Conducted a comprehensive environmental scan to assess the training needs within the field of Prior Learning Assessment and Recognition (PLAR/RPL) across Canada. The project included practitioner and employer surveys, focus groups, interviews, and research to gather insights aimed at shaping the future of RPL/PLAR in Canada, including potential development of a national RPL certificate or voluntary certification program.

Takeaway: Partnerships and collaboration with clients and interest holders make recognition and learning systems stronger, sustainable, and capable of amplifying human potential.

Learning, Teaching, and Community Engagement

This year, I had the privilege of teaching my Instructional Design course at UVic CACE guiding adult learners to design meaningful, evidence-informed learning experiences while learning alongside to shape the practice of instructional design.

I wrote many blog posts and LinkedIn Articles and contributed to BCcampus's Digital Pedagogy Toolbox with my article: Who Are We Leaving Behind? where I reflected on the hidden costs of digital pedagogy and explored how we can address these challenges and promote more inclusive learning environments.

I attended CredX: B.C.'s Inaugural Symposium on Micro-credentials, Badges, and Recognition and BCPLAN Symposium and The Accessible & Inclusive Design Conference 2025 by The Training, Learning, and Development Community and met friends and colleagues, who like me, are passionate about promoting innovative solutions, sharing insights, and supporting recognition practices and accessibility across learning and work.

I also presented at:

CAPLA Conference (May)
CAPLA Community of Learning (June) - "Reclaiming the L in RPL/PLAR"
Experience alone doesn't guarantee learning
CAPLA Fall Webinars (Nov)
BCcampus Digital Learning Strategy (DLS) Forum (Nov)

Takeaway: Ideas grow stronger when tested in dialogue with a curious and engaged community who isn't afraid to challenge you. Collaboration is where learning multiplies.

Podcasts and Panels

Being invited for podcasts and panels offered a slower, more reflective space to explore. These conversations were less about answers and more about sense-making, which felt timely.

Getting Comfortable with AI
Fingerprints of Work: Humanizing Learning & Recognition in the Age of AI
Work Fingerprints
Competencies in a Changing World of Work
Competencies make the invisible, visible

Takeaway: Thoughtful dialogue and reflection together with peers and practitioners help navigate complexity and encourage innovation.

Questions That Kept Resurfacing

Across projects, presentations, and dialogue, two questions kept resurfacing:

How do we design learning, assessment, and work systems with a human-first mindset?
How do we move beyond tools and trends to address authenticity, trust, and belonging in learning systems?

Looking Ahead to 2026

I am deeply grateful for the practitioners, educators, sector leaders, and peers who engaged thoughtfully and generously and for my colleagues, clients, partners and collaborators who trusted me with work that matters.

As we move into 2026, my commitment remains the same: to design and support learning and recognition practices that are collaborative, equitable, and deeply human.

---

I want to acknowledge that this reflection captures some of the visible work from the year, but not the failures, challenges, or breaking points that sat alongside it. Growth is uneven, learning is messy, and meaningful work is shaped as much by uncertainty as by accomplishment. So, if this resonates, I hope it does so not as a "checklist of achievements", but as a reflection on learning, partnership, and the questions that continue to shape my work and as an invitation to learn/share, and to give ourselves and others a little more grace as we continue the work.

BCcampus Digital Learning Strategy Forum 2025

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Tue, 25 Nov 2025 15:45:00 +0000

Taruna Goel Vodcast with Britt and Tracy

If AI were a song, movie, or book title, what would it be?

Well… I definitely have an answer, but you will have to watch the vodcast to hear it! I had such a great time chatting with Britt Dzioba, M.Ed. and Tracy Roberts about digital literacy, AI, and all the ways educators are trying to make sense of this moment. We reflected, we geeked out a little… and yes, I revealed my favourite tool too.

Watch the vodcast here: Taruna Goel Vodcast with Britt and Tracy

But that was just the warm-up.

Last week, over three days, the BCcampus Digital Learning Strategy Forum 2025 brought together more than 400 educators, leaders, and practitioners from BC and beyond. The theme was "Human-Centered Design in Digital Learning Environments" and every presentation, every conversation and every question was on point.

A huge thank you to the Program Committee, to every speaker who shared their expertise, and to all the participants who joined the conference. My session on "AI Literacies for Educators: From Fear to Fluency" was reflective, practical, and full of the competency-based goodness you know I adore :) We discussed the UNESCO AI Competency Framework for Educators and identified ways to include it into our teaching and learning practice.

Here is a copy of my slides: 2025 DLSForum-TarunaGoel-Slides_18Nov25

I am leaving the forum feeling inspired and hopeful about where BC’s post-secondary community is heading. And if your team or institution wants to dig deeper into AI literacy, competency frameworks, or building skills-first pathways, I would be glad to continue the conversation.

If you made it this far, what is your answer to:

"If AI were a song, movie, or book title, what would it be?"

#BCcampus #AILiteracy #AICompetencies #DigitalLiteracy #DigitalStrategy #BCPostSecondary #Educators #Teachers #Competencies #Skills #ArtificialIntelligence #CriticalAILiteracy #UNESCOAICompetencyFramework #UNESCO

From Choice to Judgment: Redefining Self-Directed Learning for the AI Era

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Tue, 11 Nov 2025 19:11:00 +0000

This reflection emerged from a recent discussion with fellow post-secondary educators, where we explored how Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles come alive in real courses and programs. In the ongoing conversations about choice and voice, I often find myself returning to a simple truth:

Choice doesn’t automatically lead to better learning.

One of the goals of UDL and of any learner-centered design is to nurture learner agency. But so many learners, including adults returning to formal education, people engaging in continuing education, or professionals participating in corporate upskilling programs, are not accustomed to navigating multiple pathways. I have seen how giving too many options can quickly shift from being empowering to being confusing or even overwhelming.

What we don’t talk about enough are the self-directed learning behaviours that make any “choice” meaningful. Things like learning how to learn, how to self-assess and reflect, and how to connect content or information with purpose. In courses and in organizations, we tend to assume the existence of these meta-learning skills, and we don't put as much energy behind developing these skills more intentionally.

This is where leadership in learning design matters.

Our role isn’t just to provide choice and flexibility; it is to create guided structures or scaffolds that help people build confidence in making informed decisions about their own learning.

Image by wal_172619 from Pixabay

At the course level, guided choice-making is about helping learners make purposeful micro-decisions within the context of specific learning outcomes. In practice, within a course, this might mean offering guided choice-making. For example, providing a choice of recommended readings and additional resources, but framing those with brief cues such as:

- “If you’re curious about the theory behind this concept, explore this reading.”
- “If you want to apply it in your work context, try this one.”

At the organizational level, the same principle scales up to how we design learning systems that balance autonomy with direction, where we enable people to self-direct their growth without being lost in choice overload.

In competency-based or skills-first organizations, guided choice can show up in multiple ways. For example:

- Curated, purpose-linked learning pathways: Organizations must offer guided learning pathways based on roles, competencies, or career aspirations. This can be aided by providing employees with self-assessment tools that map to these learning pathways. For example, the results of a self-assessment may show strong technical expertise but lower leadership competencies, and that might be an area the employee may explore next in terms of purposeful and meaningful learning experience.

- Recognition systems that reward reflective choices: Recognition systems can be designed to reward, nurture, and encourage reflective learning. For example, when an employee chooses a professional development activity, they could be asked to articulate why they chose it, how they intend to apply it, etc. Over time, these reflections can help people identify and recognize their own learning and develop the meta-skill of learning how to learn.

- Adaptive learning with human guidance: If an organization is developing skill platforms that use AI-driven recommendations, guided choice-making can mean connecting the algorithmic suggestions with human judgment, such as manager notes and recommendations, peer feedback, or self-reflection diaries or assessments that bridge the gap between machine personalization and meaningful human guidance.

Small design choices like these create big shifts. And we need these big shifts.

The next evolution of self-directed learning is already here. We need to start moving from making choices within a course towards making informed, ethical, and purposeful choices about our learning in an AI-augmented world.

As educators and learning leaders, we have to support people to not just exercise choice but to develop the judgment to use it well, and this capability feels even more critical in the age of AI.

In many ways, building choice and supporting self-directed learning behaviours isn’t just about learner autonomy anymore; it is about helping people learn how to think with AI without outsourcing their thinking to AI.

AI won't teach us how to learn; that's still our job!

#UDL #LearningDesign #AILiteracy #CriticalThinking #HumanizingAI #LifelongLearning #LearnerAgency #LeadershipInLearning #AdultLearning #LearnerAgency #InstructionalDesign

The Real Work of Training Lies Beyond Knowing and Telling

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Wed, 01 Oct 2025 11:44:00 +0000

Image by Manfred Steger from Pixabay

Recently, I was researching some academic papers on effective "Train-the-Trainer" models, and this statement from one of the papers stopped me in my tracks:

"Though individuals can be taught teaching techniques, not everyone is able to teach."

YES! 'Knowing' something isn’t the same as being able to 'teach' it and as Harold D. Stolovitch and Erica J Keeps famously put it: “Telling Ain’t Training.”

The real work of training lies beyond knowing and telling.

Teaching and training involves way more than subject matter expertise. It demands empathy, patience, curiosity, inspiration and listening. While it may seem counterintuitive, I have found that most training is about listening rather than talking, and this also means listening for what's not always said!

Training is about recognizing who is in the room, including their prior learning, experiences, interests, motivations, biases, and assumptions.

I've been doing this for over 25 years but before I step into any 'training' room and while I am in it, I ask myself:

- How do I check my assumptions about “what good learning looks like”?

- How do I challenge my biases about language, culture, confidence, or professionalism?

- How do I simplify something without dumbing it down?

- How do I resist the urge to talk too much when silence might work better?

- How do I stay present and flexible instead of always sticking to my plan?

- How do I resist giving answers and hold spaces for others’ growth?

- How do I help people lean into their own voice?

- How do I make it less about the showcase of my content knowledge and more about the facilitation of their learning?

And while I will continue to design Train-the-Trainer programs and frameworks that are about structure, tools, and approaches, what I truly want to nurture is to:

Help trainers make the shift from knowledge holders to learning facilitators

It’s a nuanced shift and a hard one to capture in a conceptual framework.

So, let me ask you. What makes someone a good trainer? Is it something we can teach or something we need to nurture?

#Trainers #TrainTheTrainers #TellingAintTeaching #Training #Facilitating #EffectiveTraining

Beyond Artificial Intelligence: Making AI "Care" Better?

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 18:33:00 +0000

Throwback Thursday: A year ago, I wrote about “work fingerprints”, the unique blend of skills, experiences, and insights that define us as humans in what is becoming a world that is increasingly being shaped by AI.

Fast-forward to today: As a part of my morning reading ritual, I took a deep dive into some recent articles and discussions on what makes us human and what the pathways are to enhance human connection.

Some ideas that stood out for me were:

"The challenge is designing AI systems that enhance human interaction rather than erode it."

"True intelligence isn’t the ability to generate information. True intelligence is the ability to generate emotion. The future of AI won't be about how fast it computes — but how deeply it connects."

"If, as we anticipate, human goals and preferences become increasingly co-constructed through interaction with AI systems, rather than arising separately from them, then AI safety requires paying as much attention to the psychology of human-AI relationships as the wider societal factors and technical methods of alignment. We now highlight core ingredients of this emergent psychological ecosystem: humans as social animals and AI systems as increasingly capable social agents."

This conversation has only become more urgent. I don't think the real risk of AI is replacement. I think it is the erasure of our unique fingerprints. It is the things that each of us leaves behind as breadcrumbs that highlight the mix of who we are through our choices, decisions, and connections with other humans.

In my work designing RPL pathways and competency-based frameworks, I have seen how often human potential goes unrecognized; not because it is missing, but because 'systems' overlook the stories behind it.

Given that, how do we ensure that technology enriches, not erodes, our fingerprints and human connections? If the next revolution is emotional, not technical, how do we make sure we are building a human-first AI ecosystem that doesn't overlook the human?

Well, the ‘godfather of AI’, Geoffrey Hinton, presented an intriguing solution in an interview with CNN where he suggested we build "maternal instincts” into AI models, so “they really care about people”. He goes on to say:

“Evolution obviously made a pretty good job with mothers. AI developers have been focusing on making these things more intelligent. But intelligence is just one part of a being. We need to make them have empathy towards us. And we don’t know how to do that yet. But evolution managed and we should be able to do it too.”

So, the challenge ahead is not (just) about making AI think better, but to help it "care" better?

https://www.hec.edu/en/knowledge/articles/ai-divide-human-not-technological

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dangardner-1/2025/05/12/the-next-ai-revolution-isnt-technical-its-emotional/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/pialauritzen/2025/08/14/geoffrey-hinton-says-ai-needs-maternal-instincts-heres-what-it-takes/

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/08/13/tech/ai-geoffrey-hinton

#WorkFingerprints #FingerprintsInAnAIWorld #HumanFirstAI #MotherAI #EmotionalIntelligence #DigitalEthics #AIEthics

Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL/PLAR) is Opening Doors for Many

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Fri, 11 Jul 2025 20:11:00 +0000

One of the most common misconceptions I often hear about Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) or Prior Learning Assessment and Recognition (PLAR) is that it's a shortcut. That it's the easy way out that lowers the standards.

But it's not.

Ask RPL Advisors and Mentors about the kind of investment that's required to help applicants understand the competency standards and collect and document evidence that maps meaningfully to those standards.

Ask successful RPL/PLAR graduates about the kind of time and effort (and emotions) it takes to prepare for a structured RPL Assessment.

Ask Assessors how much training and mindset-shifting it takes to move from checking boxes to 'assuming competence first', and then doing assessments with fairness and intention.

And ask the RPL experts and consultants, like me, who work behind the scenes with subject matter experts, industry committees, sector advisory groups and regulators to build the competency frameworks and assessment tools, develop RPL requirements and procedures, and ensure that the process and tools are valid and defensible. It takes months of consultation, alignment, and consensus-building across the industry to make sure the bar is high, transparent, and trusted.

None of it is easy.

In fact, sometimes "RPL-ing" a requirement can take longer and it often demands more reflection than attending a formal education program.

RPL doesn’t lower the standards bar, it simply focuses on various ways that people can demonstrate that they meet the standards.

Instead of forcing everyone through the same gates in the same sequence, RPL opens multiple doors by recognizing that learning happens in diverse and deeply valuable ways on the job, in life, through community, through life challenges. None of the doors are shortcuts but they do offer diversity, inclusion, fairness, relevance, and rigour.

Image by Arek Socha from Pixabay

RPL/PLAR is all about creating pathways that meet people where they are, not where the system expects them to start.

The bar stays high. The route and assessment becomes more human-centred.

------

Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) is known by many names in different countries. See: Wikipedia.
For more information on RPL/PLAR in Canada: CAPLA - https://capla.ca/

The Canadian Association for Prior Learning Assessment (CAPLA) is the national
voice for the recognition of prior learning (RPL) in Canada. CAPLA is a
Membership-based Association that offers learning and professional development
resources for RPL/PLAR practitioners.

#RPL #PLAR #VPL #CPL #RecognitionFirst #HumanPotential #LearningAndDevelopment #LifelongLearning #WorkplaceLearning #AlternatePathways

Reclaiming the 'Learning' in RPL/PLAR

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Wed, 25 Jun 2025 20:06:00 +0000

Thank you to the Canadian Association for Prior Learning Assessment (CAPLA), the Community of Learning (CoL) team and CanCred.ca 🇨🇦 for the kind recognition following my recent session:

"Reclaiming the 'L' in RPL/PLAR – Why Experience Alone Isn’t Enough."

https://passport.cancred.ca/app/badge/info/33457

It was meaningful to revisit the core principles and foundations of RPL/PLAR and focus on what lies at its heart: the recognition of real, reflective learning, not just accumulated experience.

I set out to peel back the layers of RPL and my session covered:

- The key differences between experience and learning

- Three common “experience traps” we fall into

- The consequences of mistaking experience for learning for equity, quality, and growth

- And my practical, best practices for surfacing learning that is often hidden, informal, or unspoken

It was especially rewarding to see meaningful conversations unfold in the breakout rooms from experienced practitioners and those just entering the field. Everyone shared generously and reminded me how powerful any community can be when we stay grounded in principles that matter.

#RPL #PLAR #VPL #Recognition #PriorLearningAndAssessment #RecognitionOfPriorLearning #LearningOverExperience #ReclaimingLearning #CAPLA #CAPLACOL #Community #RPLPractice

You can find the event content including my Presentation deck and the session recording in the Badge details. https://passport.cancred.ca/app/badge/info/33457

Recognition Before Reskilling

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Wed, 04 Jun 2025 18:11:00 +0000

"Recognition before reskilling." - I hope that's the message you will get from listening to the latest episode of the TIDES Podcast. I am so grateful to Shveta Malhan for inviting me as a guest, for asking such thoughtful and pragmatic questions and for creating the space for such an important conversation.

I have been working in the areas of learning and recognition for over 25 years. But what I have found is that we often rush to retrain, reskill, or retool without pausing to ask, what do our people already know. What do we value and recognize and therefore, what are we failing to see, name, and value?

In a world chasing efficiency and automation, I am all about scaling our humanity :) So, if you're curious about how we can use recognition of prior learning as a mindset to center human fingerprints in AI-powered workplaces, give this episode a listen.

Listen to the episode here https://lnkd.in/gudtsw83

I'd love to hear your thoughts on how a recognition-first mindset has helped surface skills in your work and how recognizing lived learning can change lives.

----

Shveta's Original Posting on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/shvetamalhan_tidespodcast-recognitionofpriorlearning-humanizingai

Canadian Association for Prior Learning Assessment

#RecognitionOfPriorLearning #RPL #PLAR #PLA #APL #RCC #PriorLearningAsssessmentandRecognition #HumanizingLearning #RecognitionBeforeReskilling #WorkBasedRecognition #WorkFingerprints #VPL #AI #SkillsRecognition #WorkplaceLearning #HumanCenteredDesign

From Fear to Fluency: Rethinking AI in Post-Secondary Education

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Mon, 02 Jun 2025 18:00:00 +0000

Image by Manfred Steger from Pixabay

I am writing this post as a follow-up to a recent panel discussion I participated in at the annual BEAC/BCCAT meeting. The Business Education Articulation Committee (BEAC) is part of the BC Council on Admissions and Transfer (BCCAT), bringing together educators to explore key issues in post-secondary education. The panel, titled “Getting Comfortable with AI,” was organized by BEAC Chair, Garima Kamboj and moderated by Vice-Chair, Jennifer Duffy.

I had the pleasure of sharing the virtual space with thoughtful colleagues Gwen Nguyen and Fuat Ramazanov as we discussed the evolving role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in post-secondary teaching and learning.

Below are some of the key questions we explored and the reflections I shared during the session.

"If there was one mindset shift you would recommend to post-secondary educators about AI, what would it be?"

One Mindset Shift: From Answers to Questions

A video of Steve Jobs from 1983 recently shifted my own mindset. In it, he imagines a world where machines can hold and convey the spirit of thinkers like Aristotle allowing us to ask them questions even after they’re gone. That future is here.

So, if there’s one mindset shift I’d recommend to educators, it’s this: Let’s stop treating AI as a shortcut to answers, and start seeing it as a way to deepen our questions.

The magic of education has never been about having the right answers. It’s about learning how to ask better ones. I don’t see AI as replacing educators. I see it redefining our role from content providers to social architects helping learners make meaningful connections with themselves, others, their work, and the world. In that world, AI becomes Augmented Intelligence, not Artificial Intelligence.

"Should academic integrity policies explicitly include guidance on AI use? If so, what might that look like in a way that is fair, inclusive, and educative?"

Academic Integrity: From Policing to Partnership

Yes, academic integrity policies should explicitly address AI. But not in a way that is rigid or punitive. Instead, I advocate for policies that are transparent, contextual, inclusive, and educative.

Here’s what that can look like:

- Make expectations visible. Clearly articulate when and how AI can be used and align AI use with course learning outcomes/objectives or the context of teaching.
- Prioritize disclosure over detection. Encourage statements like: “I used AI to brainstorm ideas” or “I checked clarity using a tool and revised it myself.” These aren’t confessions, they’re reflections.
- Avoid the binary. Move beyond “allowed vs. banned” and toward a continuum of use from “no AI” to “AI as co-creator.”
- Include learners. Involve students in setting norms. Ask them what responsible AI use looks like in your course context. Let policies be co-created, not just imposed.
- Model teaching with integrity rather than teaching for integrity.

In my experience, people rise to clarity. Students grow when they understand not just what is expected, but why it matters.

"What does digital fluency around AI look like for both instructors and students?"

Digital Fluency: From Tool Use to Learning Agility

Digital fluency isn’t just about knowing how to use AI tools. It’s about knowing when, why, and to what extent to use them and when not to.

For instructors, this includes:

- Enhancing human agency in teaching and learning
- Developing judgment around the technical, ethical and pedagogical dimensions of AI
- Practicing with real-world cases of integrating AI, not just introductory demos of AI tools
- Leveraging AI for driving their own lifelong professional development

It is important that instructors and educators apply frameworks like UNESCO’s AI Competency Framework for Teachers into their teaching practice.

Educators don’t need to become AI experts. But we do need to become AI-literate facilitators and be able to guide students in a landscape filled with both promise and peril.

For students, AI literacy must include:

- Learning to co-create with AI
- Critically evaluating outputs
- Practicing prompt engineering
- Understanding bias and ethical considerations

Both instructors and students need learning agility and develop their ability to adapt to rapidly evolving tools and systems. Our expectations must shift from mastery of a fixed set of AI tools to the ability to learn, unlearn, and relearn how we work with AI.

“What is one actionable step you recommend educators take next week to deepen their comfort with AI?”

One Action to Take Next Week

I invite everyone to try a "Plus One" mindset. This is a concept I love from Universal Design for Learning.

Think of one challenge you or your students consistently face. Then ask: Can AI help reduce or remove this barrier?

For example, maybe students often struggle with understanding assignment instructions. This leads to confusion, low-quality submissions, or a flood of emails. Could you use AI to rewrite your instructions in plain language? Or perhaps your students have trouble grasping abstract concepts. Could AI help generate analogies, visuals, or real-world examples at different levels of complexity giving students multiple ways to connect with the content?

You don’t need to overhaul your teaching. Just take one meaningful step. That’s the heart of Plus One thinking.

Getting comfortable with AI isn’t a sprint, it’s a marathon. So, we have to keep building our stamina and strengthening our muscles. And like any good workout, it helps to run alongside others. Let's stay connected and keep the conversation going!

Resources:

UNESCO AI Literacy Competencies – An overview: https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/what-you-need-know-about-unescos-new-ai-competency-frameworks-students-and-teachers?hub=32618

UNESCO AI Literacy Competencies for Teachers: https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/ai-competency-framework-teachers

UNESCO AI Literacy Competencies for Students: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000391105

GenAI in Teaching and Learning Toolkit for Educators: https://opentextbc.ca/teachingandlearningwithai/front-matter/introduction/

From Tabula Rasa to RPL/PLAR: Valuing What’s Already There

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Thu, 22 May 2025 21:22:00 +0000

There’s a theory, "tabula rasa", which says that we are born as blank slates. That knowledge is only gained through experience and that we start from nothing and build up from there. But is that really true?

As newborns, we instinctively root, grasp, and respond to voices. We are born with reflexes, rhythms and preferences. There is knowledge already encoded in our bodies that is passed through our DNA. New research also suggests that the knowledge of our culture, survival, pain and trauma is perhaps also stored in our cells.

And yet… in most of our learning and talent development systems, we still treat people as if they are starting from scratch. Before we acknowledge their expertise, we create plans to train, reskill, upskill, and make people 'fit' for the job.

- What if we stopped assuming blank slates and asking people to start from zero and, instead, recognized the wealth of learning and skills they bring to the table, from day one? What if Bootcamp Day 1 is all about recognition of learning and validation of skills?

- What kind of conversations can we have in our teams, organizations and industry sectors, that can allow us to acknowledge, recognize and validate this prior learning and skills and meet people where they are?

- How can we use a strength-based lens and recognition-first mindset? What can help us reframe our thinking and our work?

The answers? You will have to wait just a bit :) I had a great conversation on all things recognition of prior learning where I got a chance to chat with a wonderful colleague for their upcoming podcast. Coming soon to your feed!

In the meantime, I am heading to the Canadian Association for Prior Learning Assessment Conference in Antigonish, Nova Scotia and looking forward to both presenting and participating in all things RPL/PLAR!

May 26, 2025 - Preconference
1:15 – 4:45 p.m.
Andy Brown, CAPLA Chair; Dan McFaull and Taruna Goel, North Pacific Metrics Inc.
"Recognizing RPL Practitioners: Findings from the CAPLA/ONCAT research project"

Day 2 - May 28, 2025
10:05 - 11:05 a.m.
Dan McFaull and Taruna Goel, North Pacific Metrics Inc.
"RPL Tools for Upskilling in High Tech"

https://capla.ca/

https://caplacon2025.mailchimpsites.com/schedule

L&D in the Age of AI: Value Creators, Not Just Validators

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Sun, 04 May 2025 11:44:00 +0000

Inspired by and in response to Dr Philippa Hardman's insightful vision of ADDIE 4.0, I explore how AI is reshaping Instructional Design and why L&D professionals must go beyond validation to create cultural, ethical, and emotionally resonant learning experiences.

I propose an expanded version, ADDIE 4.1 :), where L&D acts as social architects designing not just learning, but connection, equity, and community. The way I see it, the future of L&D lies in intentionally shaping behaviour, meaning, and workplace performance alongside AI!

Image by Iris,Helen,silvy from Pixabay

Last week, I read an insightful post on how AI is impacting the role of instructional designers and the future of Instructional Design. In her latest post, Dr Philippa Hardman argues that Instructional Design isn't dying, it is infact evolving into more "specialised roles that reflect both the capabilities of generative AI and the strategic imperatives facing modern organisations." You can read her post here: https://drphilippahardman.substack.com/p/instructional-design-isnt-dying-its

I really like her take on the complimentary roles of AI & ID especially the breakdown of which tasks in the Instructional Design process are best handled by AI versus those that require human insight. It offers a good roadmap for what lies ahead. In her post, she also proposes an ADDIE 4.0 version of the classic ADDIE model focusing on "Where Humans & Machines Collide".

I appreciate the proposed ADDIE 4.0 model but I also recognize how it assumes a highly mature AI system and organization-wide, bias-free, accurate data to generate valuable learning content on an individual basis.

But this kind of data organization and personalization is very resource-intensive and perhaps somewhat unrealistic for many small and medium-sized organizations.

I am also thinking about the accuracy and fairness of data that is guiding these automated pathways. Isn't there a critical role of L&D to prevent AI from using data sets that might inadvertently reinforce existing biases or limit exposure to diverse perspectives?

Perhaps what is missing in this ADDIE 4.0 model is how L&D work goes beyond the validation function into the more value creation function by bringing the cultural, ethical, and emotional context into the work we do.

To build on Dr Philippa Hardman's vision, I would advocate for ADDIE 4.1, which expands the human L&D tasks column to bring the the lens of learning contexts around ethics, accessibility and building a community.

In my version of ADDIE 4.1, successful L&D roles and functions will need to:

1) actively identify and reduce the bias in datasets collected by AI,

2) consciously add contextual, cultural, and emotional relevance to learning in order to build a community, and

3) intentionally move beyond being the providers and validators of learning experiences to become the architects of equitable and meaningful connection and workplace performance.

In my version of ADDIE 4.1, I see L&D as social architects. Just like architects design spaces not buildings, L&D social architects will design human connection and shared meaning through learning and performance.

Because the real impact of our work lies not only in what people learn but in how they behave and how they connect, with themselves, with each other and with the work they do.

How do you see the role of L&D evolving alongside AI? I am curious to hear your thoughts and perspectives!

#InstructionalDesign #ArtificialIntelligence #AI #LearningandDevelopment #HumanCenteredDesign #FutureOfWork #LDCulture #ADDIEModel #LeveragingAI #ADDIE

L&D as Social Architects

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Fri, 11 Apr 2025 18:11:00 +0000

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

The 2025 World Happiness Report was released recently and people in Canada are less happy than they were last year. But more importantly, we are less happy than ever, since the survey began in 2005. Canada was 5th in 2015 and has now slipped to 18th. The United States also dropped to 24th and U.K. fell to 23rd. Finland once again is on top, named the happiest country in the world and has been for 8 years in a row.

Among other things, the report underscores the profound impact of social connections on individual well-being and societal happiness. And it reminds us that social connections are not about social media and building and nurturing relationships is not about the number of posts, number of followers or number of views. It is about caring, sharing meals, living with family, connecting with and supporting others, trusting others, and being kind and giving.

While Canada's ranking was disappointing; something gave me hope.

Last week, I heard Facilitating on Purpose Podcast where Beth Cougler Blom had a chat with Pete Bombaci on "Fostering Social Connection". Pete, the founder of the GenWell Project, underscored the critical role of social connections in enhancing individual well-being and community health.

Pete shared that Canada has come up with the world’s first Social Connection Guidelines developed by the Canadian Alliance for Social Connection and Health! I think it is a great first step forward and having these guidelines signals our understanding of what's important but more importantly, Canada's commitment to improving health and societal well-being.

The 2025 World Happiness Report, the "Facilitating on Purpose" podcast with Pete Bombaci, and Canada’s Social Connection Guidelines all emphasize the fundamental role of social connection in individual well-being and societal happiness.

All of this took me back to a blog post that I had written a decade ago titled, "From Dependence to Interdependence: The Changing Role of Learning Consultants".

10 years ago, I reflected on my role as a learning consultant and the move I wanted to make from creating learners who are highly dependent towards a role where my relationship with my learners is all about interdependence. I described this evolution as follows:

"I see my role as a facilitator of the process of learning and not necessarily the provider of information or knowledge. I see myself as the seed for learning conversations through which I can enable my learners to connect with other learners, their peers, and experts in their personal learning network. In that sense, I am a node in the learning path; and hopefully a critical one. I see myself as the one that connects learners and creates opportunities for interaction and engagement."

What I read and heard over the past week and what I wrote a decade ago are all deeply relevant to my work today, and to the work of facilitators, trainers, and instructional designers. We are not just learning designers or knowledge experts. We are catalysts of connection, and curators of learning environments where people feel seen, supported, and invited to grow. But not in isolation, rather within a community.

Social collaborative learning is not a new concept. But my vision for the next decade is that we lean more intentionally into our role as social architects, creating learning spaces rooted in interdependence, not just independence.

How would I imagine a social architect in the context of learning and development?

Well, they certainly aren't someone who builds walls, creates silos, or delivers knowledge (training) top-down. Instead, they are someone who designs an invisible infrastructure that makes human connection, belonging, and growth possible.

A social architect in L&D is a connector of learning, people and purpose.

I see social architects in L&D as the ones who nurture a community by weaving threads between people, ideas, experiences, and purpose where each thread represents a moment of learning and shared meaning.

Just like architects design spaces not buildings, L&D social architects design human connection and shared meaning through learning. Because the real impact of our work lies not only in what people learn but in how they behave and how they connect, with themselves, with each other and with the work they do.

When Recognizing Prior Learning Raises the Standard

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Thu, 10 Apr 2025 23:04:00 +0000

The NSCDA Certification Program for Career Practitioners has been named a finalist for the Professional Certification Program of the Year at the e-Assessment Awards 2025 and as you can tell, I am feeling proud!

I had the opportunity to contribute to this project as a consultant, working alongside Dan McFaull, the team at North Pacific Inc., and NSCDA’s dedicated team. Together, we co-designed and validated a competency-based certification model rooted in recognizing prior learning and supported by robust, real-world assessment tools.

Launched on December 10, 2024, the National Career Development Certification (NCDC) program has set a new national standard for Career Development Professionals (CDPs) across Canada. It ensures that all certified CDPs meet consistent, measurable standards of excellence and ethical practice, which is not only raising the professional standards of CDPs but also benefiting job seekers, students, employees, and employers nationwide.

This international recognition by the e-Assessment Association underscores the value of thoughtful, inclusive, and forward-looking approaches such as RPL/PLAR for professional assessment and certification. The awards will take place in London this June, and I’m so happy to see Canada’s work in this space being celebrated on the global stage! Wish the team all the very best!

Congratulations to the incredible team at NSCDA Lindsay Guitard Tara Deveau, BRM CCDPcm Ashley Halverson Teresa Francis Kathy McKee Sareena Hopkins CCDF-FCDC and many others who've played a big part and to all the partners including the Advisory committee and the Technical Working Group and the 515 recently certified CDPs!

It’s a beautiful thing when your work in advancing a profession makes a real impact.

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7316232458805383168/

#RPL #PLAR #Certification #CareerDevelopment #CompetencyBasedLearning #ProfessionalRecognition #NSCDA #WorkforceDevelopment #LearningAndDevelopment #ProudMoment

Digital Pedagogy Toolbox: Who Are We Leaving Behind?

noreply@blogger.com (Taruna Goel) — Mon, 24 Mar 2025 18:11:00 +0000

Photo by Taruna Goel

As a member of the post-secondary education community in B.C., I, like many others, have celebrated the expansion of digital pedagogies and the B.C. Post-Secondary Digital Literacy Framework as a way to promote flexibility, accessibility, and innovation. But beneath the surface, I have realized that perhaps some students, and some instructors, are quietly struggling to keep up.

As we adopt digital transformation, we must ask ourselves: who are we leaving behind? Are we unintentionally creating learning environments that benefit some while disadvantaging others?

In this article, I reflect on the hidden costs of an increasingly digital learning landscape. I also highlight how some of the strategies included in the Guidelines for Technology-Enhanced Learning can help post-secondary educators design more inclusive learning experiences that ensure all learners have equitable opportunities to succeed.

The Hidden Costs of Digital Pedagogy

I teach a post-secondary course, Instructional Design in Adult Education, at the University of Victoria (UVic) as a part of the Certificate in Adult and Continuing Education (CACE) program. The course is an asynchronous, online course. While I am always excited about the opportunity to introduce adult learners to instructional design, I also realize that teaching the course in this format, though incredibly flexible, poses its own set of challenges; not only for me as an Instructor, but for my students as well.

I have facilitated this course for many years and what strikes me most in this teaching experience is how digital tools that are meant to enhance learning can sometimes unintentionally create barriers. The tools and technologies that promise flexibility or accessibility can leave some learners feeling excluded.

Online and/or hybrid learning was often framed as offering students more flexibility and choice. Given that students come from diverse backgrounds and have diverse needs, flexibility is desirable. However, while flexibility has the potential to increase access for some learners, the form it takes needs to be addressed. (Ikebuchi, 2023, p. 15)

Digital learning environments, especially asynchronous ones like the course I teach, are often framed as offering freedom, but that freedom comes with hidden costs. As instructors, we must acknowledge the challenges and hidden costs of digital pedagogies including cognitive, emotional, and financial costs. The systems that seem to work for the most tech-savvy students sometimes overlook those who are still adjusting to the pace of digital education or grappling with the overwhelming demands of digital pedagogy.

Who Struggles in the Digital Environment

While online/hybrid learning offers the promise of greater support for learners from marginalized groups such as those with learning differences and/or disabilities, or those who live in underserved, remote/rural communities (often Indigenous communities), these are often the groups that are most identified as facing challenges of access to technology, the Internet, or accessible content. Addressing issues of access is vital if institutions want education to be equitable and inclusive. Learners cannot be expected to have digital literacy skills if they do not have access to technology. Students with learning differences and/or disabilities can only benefit from online learning if they can access the content in equitable ways. (Ikebuchi, 2023, p. 14)

After teaching and working in the online learning world for over two decades, I have come to realize that digital learning isn’t inherently more inclusive; in fact, it often amplifies existing disparities.

Students without digital fluency

Many students struggle with digital literacy, and this isn’t just a generational issue. While some of us may take it for granted, it is not easy to navigate different types of learning management systems, stay organized using digital and cloud-based resources and tools, and engage in asynchronous discussions and group work. It requires a level of digital literacy that not all students possess. Without focused guidance, these learners are not able to keep pace. Also, technology evolves so quickly that if you take a break from it for a year or two, or don’t use it for education and learning, getting back to it can be intimidating and overwhelming.

As an instructor I cannot assume digital fluency; it is something that must be taught and supported. Also, I view digital literacy not as an isolated skill, but an integrated part of the educational journey.

As post-secondary educators, we need to remember that integrating digital literacy into every aspect of the learning journey is not just a pedagogical choice; it’s an ethical imperative. It ensures that learners are equipped with the skills and knowledge they need to succeed academically, professionally, and personally in an increasingly digital world. (Goel, 2023)

Students with disabilities and neurodiverse learners

In the online environment, neurodivergent students and students with disabilities are faced with barriers like cognitive overload, poor UX/UI design, and overreliance on text-based digital content and resources. Tools like auto-generated captions and screen readers help, but they are often secondary considerations rather than a core design philosophy. Students in my class who report their ADHD difficulties usually express how they have difficulty with web-based course platforms being distracting and overwhelming, especially when the layout, navigation, and functionality across courses and programs are inconsistent.

Without one-on-one dialogue and individual mentoring, these students are behind the game before they even begin. I am more than willing to help those who reach out, but I cannot help but think about how many others are quietly struggling without anyone even knowing it.

Non-traditional students

My course attracts many adult learners returning to post-secondary education after years in the workforce. They also come from a variety of backgrounds including sectors that may or may not be considered tech-savvy. Many are mid-career professionals transitioning into training and education roles (e.g., tradesmen, clinicians, therapists, nurses, law enforcement officers, and emergency responders). They are returning to university digital learning environments and struggling to meet the expectations of online participation and engagement.

These learners are proficient in their field of practice and have specialized areas of expertise but may or may not have experience with online, formal learning. They struggle with the self-directed nature of many online courses and often find themselves isolated from other students who are more comfortable with digital tools. When they see other students navigating the online platforms with ease, and engaging in extensive virtual discussions and collaborative activities, they often experience frustration. This can sometimes affect their confidence in their ability to succeed in the course, and lead to disengagement and dropping the course. As an instructor, I have trained myself to be particularly sensitive to the needs of these non-traditional learners. Regular personal check-ins, clear expectations, and opportunities for in-person interaction such as frequent office hours can help support their learning and engagement.

Financially disadvantaged students

During COVID, we all realized that the digital divide wasn’t just about access to the internet. It was about high-speed connectivity, updated devices, specialized software, and, more importantly, quiet study and working spaces. As more assessments and courses move online, students with limited resources face more hurdles. The hidden costs of digital pedagogy are often financial and these barriers are rarely acknowledged in the broader conversation about digital education.

As stated in the B.C. Post-Secondary Digital Literacy Framework:

A person’s access to adequate hardware and software is required for developing digital literacy. However, not all people in B.C. have access to hardware and software, nor are included in digital or online environments. Therefore, alongside this framework, post-secondary institutions are encouraged to consider and address barriers learners might encounter when accessing digital learning spaces including connectivity, software, devices, and learning spaces. (Government of B.C., n.d., p.3)

Students who are digitally fatigued

There’s an important emotional hidden cost of digital pedagogies around digital fatigue. Yes, digital pedagogies are making online education flexible, but for many students, it feels like an ‘always-on’ environment with no clear boundaries between personal and academic life. In my teaching, I have observed how students can experience online burnout from managing work, study, and life because everything is increasingly becoming more digital!

The challenge is not about just keeping up with content, it is about managing what seems like an unending stream of digital interactions. This constant connectivity can lead to burnout and a sense of detachment. In the context of digital fatigue, conversations around the mental health and well-being of both university students and instructors are important topics in post-secondary education.

What Can Post-Secondary Educators Do?

Digital transformation, though revolutionary, is not always inclusive. But digital pedagogies don’t have to be exclusionary. By designing more intentionally, educators can mitigate some of the hidden costs of digital pedagogies.

Professional development topics related to digital learning are broad and varied. Like the challenges related to digital learning, some topics are directly related to technology use and others are more technology-adjacent (professional development related to assessment, instructional practices, and student support. (Canadian Digital Learning Research Association, 2024, p. 26)

The Guidelines for Technology-Enhanced Learning were developed by the Quality Enhancement Working Group in alignment with recommended action 1 (a) from the Digital Learning Strategy. These guidelines provide a roadmap for post-secondary institutions in British Columbia to ensure digital learning models are inclusive, equitable, and sustainable.

Among other things, the guidelines emphasize:

Designing for equity and inclusion

Digital learning environments should accommodate diverse learners by considering systemic inequities and integrating Universal Design for Learning (UDL). In addition, institutions should use intersectional approaches to assess how different groups experience digital learning.
Accessibility should extend beyond compliance with technical standards to address barriers related to technology access, affordability, and student support services.

Addressing the digital divide

Not all students have access to reliable technology. The guidelines recommend low and no-tech alternatives such as providing downloadable or print-based course material, offering technology borrowing programs, and creating physical learning spaces where students can access digital tools.
Institutions should clarify how required technologies align with learning outcomes and provide alternative ways to complete coursework if students face barriers.

Supporting educators and learners

Technology-enhanced learning should take a human-centred approach. Institutions should provide mental health and well-being support for both students and staff in digital environments.
It is important to create opportunities for educators to upskill so they can effectively teach in digital environments. Educators need ongoing professional development in digital pedagogy so that they can develop new teaching strategies and design models that support the needs of digital environments and inclusive learning practices.

Moving Forward: Making Digital Learning Work for Everyone

The 2024 Pan-Canadian report on digital learning states:

Given the continuing interest in increasing hybrid, online, and technology-supported learning, it is important to acknowledge the challenges associated with technology adoption. Some challenges, like faculty and student digital literacy or technology infrastructure, are directly related to technology use, whereas others are more systemic in nature and become more pronounced when technology is introduced into the institutional context (e.g., faculty fatigue and burnout, quality assurance, and addressing inequities). (Canadian Digital Learning Research Association, 2024, p.21)

While digital learning offers new opportunities, it also creates barriers that disproportionately affect some learners. As we continue to innovate, we must also recognize and address the hidden costs of digital pedagogies that prevent both students and instructors from fully participating.

By leveraging the Guidelines for Technology-Enhanced Learning we can navigate the expanding use of digital technologies in teaching and learning. This includes fostering the development of localized digital literacy policies and increasing digital literacy knowledge, skills, and abilities for all, including people of all levels of digital experience, backgrounds, contexts, and worldviews. We want to create a post-secondary system that truly works for everyone, not just those with access to the right tools and resources.

References

Canadian Digital Learning Research Association. (2024). 2024 Pan-Canadian report on digital learning: https://cdlra-acrfl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/2024-Pan-Canadian-Report_EN.pdf

Goel, T. (2023, November 15). Digital pedagogy toolbox: Integrating digital literacy practices. BCcampus. https://bccampus.ca/2023/11/15/digital-pedagogy-toolbox-integrating-digital-literacy-practices/

Government of British Columbia (n.d.). The B.C. Post-Secondary Digital Literacy Framework https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/post-secondary-education/institution-resources-administration/digital-learning-strategy/bc_post-secondary_digital_literacy_framework.pdf

Government of British Columbia (n.d.). Appendix 1: Guidelines for Technology-Enhanced Learning https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/post-secondary-education/institution-resources-administration/digital-learning-strategy/guidelines_for_technology-enhanced_learning.pdf

Ikebuchi, S. (2023). Accessing education: Equity, diversity, and inclusion in online learning. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 49(1). https://doi.org/10.21432/cjlt28349 https://cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/28349

------------

Originally published by BCcampus: https://bccampus.ca/2025/03/05/digital-pedagogy-toolbox-who-are-we-leaving-behind/