The Aletheian Design Theory of Learning
Where educators become designers of possibility. This course introduces ADTL as a practical design lens for instruction—grounded in cognitive architecture, cultural connection, and aesthetic experience—and built through studio practice, iteration, and critique.
Click a phase/pill to see how the lesson is expressed through each framework.
How this lesson lives in AVID (WICOR)
Students record observations, capture evidence, and draft justifications that make their thinking visible and checkable.
How this lesson lives in Cognia
Learners make active choices and track visible progress markers that build ownership and attention.
Establish what ADTL is (and what it is not), identify the three domains (cognitive, cultural, aesthetic), and begin translating “teaching moves” into “design choices.”
- Define ADTL as a design theory of learning anchored in cognition, culture, and aesthetics.
- Describe the educator as a designer responsible for clarity, meaning, and experience.
- “Design Lens Walkthrough”: annotate a familiar lesson for cognitive/cultural/aesthetic signals.
- “Choice Mapping”: list 10 instructional choices and label what each choice designs (attention, meaning, identity, etc.).
- ADTL One-Pager: a concise visual explaining ADTL in your own language (diagram + examples).
Expectation: Your one-pager must include at least one real classroom example for each ADTL domain.
Demonstrate mastery by defending your ADTL one-pager with evidence, critique language, and revision logic.
- Present your ADTL one-pager in 3 minutes with 3 claims and 3 evidence points.
- Answer critique questions using “design rationale” language (why this choice, what it designs, how it serves learners).
- Warm feedback: name what is clearest and why.
- Cool feedback: identify one ambiguity and propose a design revision.
- Revision commitment: choose one change and justify it using ADTL domains.
- Revised ADTL one-pager + short revision memo (what changed, why, impact on learners).
Mastery check: Your revision memo must explicitly reference cognitive, cultural, and aesthetic implications.
Learn to design the “thinking pathway”: sequence, chunking, retrieval, modeling, and cognitive load decisions.
- Identify where instruction overloads working memory and redesign for clarity.
- Build a simple learning architecture: model → guided practice → independent practice → retrieval.
- “Load Audit”: highlight friction points in a lesson and label them (too much at once, unclear model, missing retrieval).
- “Sequence Repair”: redesign a 20-minute segment using chunking + checks for understanding.
- Cognitive Design Map: a 1-page diagram of the revised sequence with rationale notes.
Expectation: Your map must show where attention is guided and where retrieval is required.
Exhibit mastery by defending your cognitive redesign with evidence, predicting learner outcomes, and revising through critique.
- Show “Before vs After” and name 3 cognitive problems you solved.
- Explain how each change reduces load or increases retrieval/transfer.
- Where is the model visible and repeatable?
- Where do learners practice with feedback?
- Where is retrieval unavoidable?
- Revised Cognitive Design Map + “Learner Impact Prediction” (3 predicted improvements, 1 risk).
Mastery check: Your defense must include a rationale for sequencing and assessment checkpoints.
Design for belonging and relevance: connect content to learners’ lives without flattening culture into decoration.
- Identify whose experiences are centered (and missing) in a lesson.
- Design authentic bridges: prompts, examples, and inquiry choices that respect learner identity.
- “Center/Margin Map”: analyze what perspectives are centered by default.
- “Bridge Build”: create 3 culturally responsive entry points (story, problem, artifact, local connection).
- Cultural Connection Addendum: a one-page insert that changes how learners enter the content.
Expectation: Your addendum must include one choice that increases student agency (voice, selection, or interpretation).
Demonstrate mastery by critiquing for authenticity, equity, and agency—then revising your cultural addendum with integrity.
- Explain how your addendum increases belonging and meaning (not superficial “relatability”).
- Identify one potential harm (stereotype, tokenization, exclusion) and prevent it through design.
- Is the connection authentic to learners or to the designer’s assumptions?
- Does the task increase agency or merely change aesthetics?
- Who gains voice and who remains silent?
- Revised Cultural Connection Addendum + reflection: “What I changed to increase integrity.”
Mastery check: Your revision must include a concrete agency mechanism (choice, creation, or interpretation).
Design the “feel” of learning: layout, pacing, typography, visual hierarchy, and sensory restraint that supports comprehension.
- Explain how visual/aesthetic choices influence comprehension and motivation.
- Redesign an instructional artifact for hierarchy, rhythm, and readability.
- “Before/After Visual Pass”: improve one artifact (slide, handout, LMS page) using 3 hierarchy rules.
- “Tone Dial”: set an emotional tone (safe/curious/energetic) and design to match it.
- Aesthetic Redesign Portfolio: original + redesigned artifact + a short rationale.
Expectation: Your rationale must name which comprehension barriers were reduced and how.
Exhibit mastery by justifying aesthetic decisions as cognitive support and revising based on critique and learner impact.
- Defend 5 design choices (hierarchy, spacing, contrast, rhythm, tone) with cognitive rationale.
- Use critique language: “This choice designs attention by…” “This revision reduces load because…”
- What is the eye drawn to first and why?
- Is the artifact calm and navigable—or visually loud?
- Does the tone match the learning purpose?
- Revised artifact + a “Design Rationale Ledger” (bullet list of decisions and outcomes).
Mastery check: The ledger must connect each design move to a learning outcome (clarity, memory, engagement).
Use the ADTL learning cycle to design a coherent sequence where exploration and synthesis lead to visible mastery.
- Describe each stage of the learning cycle and what it designs in the learner.
- Build a lesson map where each stage is intentional and visible.
- “Cycle Map”: map an existing lesson into the 6 stages (identify gaps).
- “Stage Repair”: redesign one missing stage to make it real (activity + evidence).
- ADTL Cycle Lesson Map: 1-page sequence with inputs, outputs, and evidence for each stage.
Expectation: Each stage must name the evidence you expect students to produce.
Prove mastery by critiquing your cycle map for coherence, evidence quality, and mastery validity—then revising.
- Defend how your sequence produces mastery (not just completion).
- Show where synthesis happens and how it becomes application.
- Does each stage have a purpose and an evidence artifact?
- Are reflection prompts improving thinking or merely collecting opinions?
- Is mastery observable and assessable?
- Revised Cycle Map + “Mastery Evidence Rubric” (simple criteria for what counts as mastery).
Mastery check: Your rubric must assess justification and design rationale—not preference.
Build an ethical design habit: document constraints, anticipate trade-offs, and justify decisions with learner-centered integrity.
- Explain why constraints matter and how they shape design ethics.
- Document decisions in a ledger that makes your thinking auditable and revisable.
- “Constraint Scan”: time, tools, attention, accessibility, language, community expectations.
- “Trade-off Write”: name one decision and what it improves vs what it risks.
- Designer’s Ledger: a living log of decisions, constraints, and revisions (template-based).
Expectation: Your ledger must include at least one accessibility decision and one cultural integrity decision.
Demonstrate course mastery by presenting a complete ADTL redesign: rationale, artifacts, ledger evidence, and critique-based revision.
- Present a redesigned learning experience (sequence + cultural bridge + aesthetic revision).
- Use the Designer’s Ledger to justify decisions and show revision history.
- Show learner evidence targets: what mastery looks like and how it is assessed.
- Is cognitive design coherent and teachable?
- Is cultural connection authentic and agency-building?
- Is aesthetic experience calm, legible, and purpose-aligned?
- Is mastery defined with evidence—not vibes?
- Final revised package: lesson map + artifacts + rubric + ledger + reflection.
Mastery check: You must defend at least 8 design decisions using ADTL domain language and evidence reasoning.