Reflections
Navigating the Transition: From Service to Design
As I prepare to transition from 25+ years of active duty service in the United States Coast Guard to the civilian sector, my professional trajectory is defined by specific proximal and distal goals. My proximal goal is to master the tools of the modern instructional designer—specifically the integration of AI-driven content generation and LMS architecture—to translate my technical background in Cybersecurity and engineering project management into educational assets. This immediate skill acquisition bridges the gap between my operational experience and pedagogical theory.
My distal goal is to establish a consultancy focused on high-stakes technical training, where I can lead organizations in modernizing their legacy training systems. By applying the discipline of military leadership to the agility of my "Zero Divisor" philosophy, I aim to disrupt stagnant learning models. Ultimately, I see myself not just as a creator of content, but as a strategic architect who uses instructional design to solve systemic organizational performance issues.
The Marketplace Demand for Agility: AI and Microlearning
The modern marketplace is no longer satisfied with static, hour-long e-learning modules; it demands agility and personalization. Two emerging trends driving this shift are Artificial Intelligence (AI) integration and mobile-first microlearning. As noted by Savage (2025), AI is shifting from a futuristic concept to a collaborative partner, automating data-driven tasks to allow designers to focus on strategy. This trend affects the field by requiring designers to become "editors" of AI-generated content rather than just authors, significantly speeding up the development cycle.
Simultaneously, the "busy workforce" demographic necessitates microlearning—short, focused bursts of content accessible on mobile devices. Stefaniak (2021) emphasizes that instructional solutions must respect the learner's environment; today, that environment is fragmented and mobile. For instructional designers, this means abandoning the "broadcast" style of long lectures in favor of conversation-first, bite-sized assets that solve immediate problems.
Integrity in the Age of Algorithms
In the field of instructional design, "integrity" is often synonymous with academic honesty, but in practice, it extends to the ethical representation of data and the learner's time. Aligning with the Canyon Center for Character Education competencies, specifically Integrity and Service, my work demonstrates a commitment to "truth-telling" in design. This means avoiding "dark patterns" that trick learners into engagement and instead designing transparent, user-centered experiences.
Honesty in my professional work is demonstrated by acknowledging the limitations of a training solution. As a "Zero Divisor," I believe that disrupting a broken system is an act of service. If a client requests training for a problem that is actually environmental (e.g., bad tools), integrity requires me to push back and recommend a non-instructional solution, rather than selling them a course that won't work. By serving the learner's actual needs rather than the client's perceived wants, I maintain the ethical standards essential to the profession.
The Sente Kinetic Mind: Designing with Initiative
In the strategy game of Go, Sente refers to the state of holding the initiative—forcing the environment to respond to your moves rather than the other way around. My professional philosophy, Sente Kinetic Mind, translates this concept into instructional design by rejecting the passive role of "order taker." Traditional design often operates in Gote (reacting), waiting for performance gaps to become critical failures before deploying a solution. A Kinetic Mind strategy is preemptive.
By applying the "Kinetic Mind" approach, I design systems that move at the speed of the learner's environment. This involves using predictive analysis to identify friction points and deploying performance support that meets the learner before the gap widens. This shift from reactive content creation to proactive system architecture ensures that the instructional solution controls the flow of performance, serving as a strategic asset rather than a corrective measure (Stefaniak, 2021).
References
Savage, O. (2025, March 10). AI as a collaborative partner: Redefining roles in the workplace. The Learning Guild.
Stefaniak, J. E. (2021). Needs assessment for learning and performance: Theory, process, and practice. Routledge.
