If you've worked in instructional design long enough, you've probably noticed that certain questions come up repeatedly. What's the best way to organize an online course? How long should an instructional video be? Should every discussion be graded? Is it better to use a quiz, a project, or a written assignment? Faculty members ask these questions because they want clear guidance, and understandably, they often expect a straightforward answer.
Unfortunately, the answer is frequently two words that nobody particularly wants to hear: "It depends."
I realize that response can sound suspiciously like an attempt to avoid making a decision. After all, faculty members don't schedule consultations with instructional designers just to hear that every situation is different. They want recommendations, practical solutions, and sometimes a little reassurance that they're heading in the right direction. However, experienced instructional designers understand that effective teaching decisions rarely exist independently of the learners, objectives, available resources, and instructional environment.
The real skill is not knowing how to say "it depends." It's knowing how to explain what it depends on and helping someone make an informed decision. That distinction separates vague advice from meaningful instructional consultation. In this article, we'll examine why instructional design requires professional judgment, how context influences instructional decisions, and how experienced designers turn an initially frustrating answer into a productive conversation.
Why Instructional Design Rarely Has One Perfect Answer
Instructional design draws upon learning science, educational psychology, technology, accessibility, assessment, and practical teaching experience. These fields provide principles that help guide decisions, but they do not always produce one universally correct solution. What works well for one group of learners may be less appropriate for another, even when the subject matter is similar.
Consider a faculty member asking whether recorded lectures should be divided into shorter videos. In many situations, shorter, focused recordings make information easier to navigate and allow learners to review individual concepts without searching through a lengthy presentation. However, the appropriate length also depends on the content, the purpose of the recording, and the activities surrounding it. A five-minute demonstration of a software feature serves a different instructional purpose than a detailed analysis of a complex historical event.
An instructional designer who automatically recommends the same video length for every situation may be applying a general guideline without considering its purpose. A more thoughtful response examines what learners need to accomplish, how the content is organized, and whether the recording supports those goals. The recommendation may still involve shorter videos, but it is now grounded in the instructional situation rather than an arbitrary rule.
This is one reason experienced instructional designers become increasingly comfortable with uncertainty. They understand that professional judgment involves evaluating several reasonable options rather than searching for one perfect answer that applies everywhere.
"It Depends" Should Begin the Conversation, Not End It
One of the biggest mistakes an instructional designer can make is responding with "it depends" and leaving the conversation there. While technically accurate, that answer provides little practical assistance. The faculty member still has a problem to solve, and the designer has not offered a meaningful path forward.
A more useful response explains the factors that influence the decision. For example, when an instructor asks whether discussions should be graded, an instructional designer might ask what students are expected to accomplish through those discussions. Are learners practicing argumentation, applying course concepts, building community, or demonstrating mastery? The answer helps determine whether grading is necessary and what type of evaluation would be appropriate.
If the discussion is primarily intended to encourage reflection and community-building, participation feedback or a low-stakes approach may be sufficient. If students must demonstrate evidence-based analysis or disciplinary reasoning, a rubric aligned with those expectations may be appropriate. The important point is that the grading decision follows the instructional purpose rather than preceding it.
Good consultation transforms "it depends" into a series of useful questions. Those questions help clarify the problem, identify relevant constraints, and guide the conversation toward an appropriate recommendation.
Begin With the Learning Objective
When instructional designers encounter competing approaches, learning objectives provide one of the most reliable starting points. Before choosing an activity, assessment, or technology, we should understand what learners are expected to know or do. Without that information, recommendations can easily become disconnected from the actual purpose of instruction.
Imagine an instructor asking whether a multiple-choice quiz or a written assignment would be better for a particular module. The answer depends heavily on the intended learning outcome. If students need to identify terminology or distinguish among foundational concepts, a carefully constructed quiz may provide appropriate evidence of learning. If students must develop an argument, evaluate evidence, or justify a decision, a written analysis may offer a better opportunity to demonstrate those skills.
Neither assessment format is automatically superior. Each can be effective when it measures the intended performance and provides appropriate evidence of achievement. Problems arise when instructional decisions are based primarily on convenience, tradition, or familiarity rather than alignment.
This is why experienced instructional designers frequently return to a simple question: What do you want learners to be able to do? Once that question is answered, many decisions become easier. The learning objective does not eliminate every design consideration, but it establishes a foundation for evaluating the available options.
Learner Characteristics Change the Answer
Instructional strategies do not operate independently of the people participating in the learning experience. Prior knowledge, professional experience, motivation, technical confidence, accessibility needs, and available time all influence how learners interact with instruction. A strategy that supports one audience may create unnecessary barriers for another.
Consider a professional development workshop introducing faculty to a new learning management system feature. Participants who have extensive experience with the platform may prefer a brief demonstration followed by an opportunity to experiment independently. Faculty members who are using the system for the first time may need a more structured walkthrough with guided practice and opportunities to ask questions. Both groups are learning the same technology, but they may benefit from different levels of instructional support.
Adult learners also bring different goals and expectations to educational experiences. Someone completing a required certification may approach the course differently from someone voluntarily pursuing a personal interest. Likewise, an experienced professional returning to graduate school may possess considerable disciplinary knowledge while still needing guidance with unfamiliar academic technologies.
Instructional designers should avoid assuming that one instructional approach will serve every learner equally well. Understanding the audience helps determine where flexibility, scaffolding, additional resources, or alternative approaches may be necessary. The goal is not to create an entirely different course for every individual. It is designing learning experiences that anticipate reasonable differences among learners.
Context Matters More Than Trends
Educational technology changes rapidly, and new tools frequently arrive with promises of improved engagement, efficiency, or learning outcomes. Faculty members understandably want to know whether they should adopt the latest platform or instructional approach. However, a tool's popularity does not automatically make it appropriate for a particular course.
Imagine an instructor asking whether students should use a collaborative whiteboard application for a group activity. The technology might provide an engaging environment for brainstorming and organizing ideas. However, the instructional designer should also consider whether the tool is accessible, whether students can use it on their available devices, whether it requires additional accounts, and whether collaboration is actually necessary to achieve the learning objective.
If the activity requires students to organize competing ideas and develop a shared solution, a collaborative tool may be useful. If students are simply responding to a short reflection question, introducing another platform may create more work than instructional benefit. The technology should support the learning activity rather than become the reason the activity exists.
Experienced instructional designers learn to separate instructional purpose from technological novelty. Sometimes the most appropriate recommendation involves an advanced tool with specialized capabilities. Other times, a clearly organized document, a well-designed discussion prompt, or an existing learning management system feature accomplishes the same goal with fewer complications.
Accessibility Is Not an "It Depends" Question
Although many instructional decisions require flexibility, some expectations are not optional. Accessibility provides an important example because instructional designers must distinguish between decisions that allow professional discretion and requirements that must be satisfied.
Whether instructional materials should be accessible is not a matter of preference. Applicable accessibility requirements, institutional policies, and established standards provide expectations that courses must meet. However, the methods used to provide accessible learning experiences may vary depending on the instructional content and technology involved.
For example, a faculty member may ask whether an instructional diagram needs alternative text. The requirement to provide an accessible alternative for meaningful visual information is clear, but the appropriate implementation depends on the image's purpose. A simple photograph may need a brief description, while a complex scientific diagram may require a longer explanation or an additional accessible resource. A purely decorative image may be marked so assistive technologies can skip it.
The distinction matters because "it depends" should never become an excuse for ignoring established requirements. Experienced instructional designers identify what is required, explain where flexibility exists, and recommend approaches that satisfy both accessibility expectations and instructional goals. Professional judgment operates within those boundaries rather than replacing them.
Faculty Workload Is Part of the Equation
One of the less discussed aspects of instructional design is that recommendations must be realistic for the people responsible for implementing them. An activity may be instructionally sound but difficult to maintain within the available time, staffing, or resources. Experienced designers consider sustainability alongside instructional quality.
Suppose a faculty member asks whether every student should receive detailed, individualized written feedback on every weekly discussion post. From a purely instructional standpoint, meaningful feedback can support learning. However, the feasibility of that approach changes considerably when an instructor teaches several large sections and manages numerous other responsibilities.
An instructional designer might recommend a combination of feedback strategies rather than treating individualized comments as the only acceptable approach. Rubrics, whole-class feedback, automated explanations for practice activities, targeted instructor comments, and peer review can each serve different purposes. The appropriate combination depends on the learning objectives, class size, assignment type, and available resources.
This does not mean sacrificing instructional quality simply because a better approach requires effort. It means designing practices that can be maintained consistently. An elaborate feedback strategy that works for two weeks before becoming unmanageable may ultimately serve learners less effectively than a simpler approach the instructor can sustain throughout the semester.
Knowing When to Recommend and When to Require
Instructional designers frequently operate in environments where they must balance professional recommendations with institutional requirements. Faculty may have considerable autonomy over teaching methods, while universities establish expectations related to accessibility, course quality, academic policies, and technology use. Understanding the difference between a recommendation and a requirement is an important professional skill.
For example, an instructional designer may strongly recommend using consistent module structures because predictable navigation supports learner confidence and reduces unnecessary confusion. However, unless the institution has established a specific organizational requirement, faculty may have flexibility in how they structure their courses. The designer should explain the reasoning behind the recommendation without presenting a personal preference as an institutional mandate.
Other situations involve requirements that are not negotiable. If an institution requires particular syllabus information, accessible instructional materials, or compliance with established academic policies, instructional designers must communicate those expectations clearly. The conversation can still focus on finding practical ways to meet the requirements, but the underlying obligation remains.
Experienced designers learn that credibility depends partly on communicating these distinctions accurately. When every suggestion sounds mandatory, faculty may become frustrated or skeptical. When requirements are presented as optional, important responsibilities may be overlooked. Clear communication helps faculty understand where they can make choices and where established expectations apply.
The Value of Asking Better Questions
One of the defining characteristics of experienced instructional designers is the ability to ask questions that reveal the real instructional problem. Rather than immediately recommending a solution, they examine the purpose, context, and constraints surrounding the request. This process often changes the direction of the conversation.
Consider a faculty member who says, "I need students to participate more in my online course." A designer might initially think about discussion boards, interactive videos, collaborative assignments, or other engagement strategies. However, the request does not yet explain what participation means or why the instructor believes it is insufficient.
A more productive consultation begins by clarifying the concern. Are students failing to complete assignments? Are they completing work but contributing little to discussions? Are they struggling to apply course concepts? Does the instructor want more interaction among students, or are learners having difficulty connecting with the instructor?
Each answer suggests a different instructional problem and potentially a different solution. Increasing discussion requirements will not necessarily improve assignment completion, and adding interactive technology will not automatically strengthen conceptual understanding. By asking better questions, instructional designers avoid solving the wrong problem.
This is also where consultation becomes a form of leadership. The instructional designer is not simply responding to requests but helping faculty examine teaching and learning decisions more carefully. Over time, these conversations can change how instructors approach course design because they begin asking similar questions themselves.
Experience Helps You Recognize Patterns
As instructional designers gain experience, they begin noticing patterns across courses, disciplines, and faculty consultations. Problems that initially appear unique often share common causes. Confusing assignment instructions, misaligned assessments, excessive content, inconsistent navigation, and limited opportunities for practice appear in many different instructional environments.
Recognizing these patterns helps experienced designers respond more efficiently without relying on one-size-fits-all solutions. They may have encountered similar challenges before and can draw upon previous experiences to identify promising approaches. However, they also understand that familiar symptoms do not always indicate identical causes.
For example, two courses may experience low discussion participation for entirely different reasons. In one course, prompts may encourage repetitive responses that provide little opportunity for meaningful interaction. In another, students may be interested in the topic but unclear about participation expectations. The same surface-level problem requires different interventions because the underlying circumstances differ.
Experience becomes most useful when it informs professional judgment rather than replacing investigation. Senior instructional designers learn to recognize patterns while remaining curious about the details that make each situation different. They use previous knowledge as a starting point, not as a substitute for understanding the current problem.
"It Depends" Is Not the Same as Avoiding Responsibility
There is an important difference between acknowledging uncertainty and refusing to make a recommendation. Instructional designers should not use "it depends" as a way to avoid difficult decisions or uncomfortable conversations. Faculty members seek guidance because they expect professional knowledge to help them evaluate options.
A useful consultation eventually moves beyond identifying variables and toward recommending a course of action. The designer may explain that several approaches could work, identify the strengths and limitations of each, and recommend the option most appropriate for the situation. That recommendation should be grounded in instructional reasoning and communicated with enough confidence to help the faculty member move forward.
For example, an instructor might ask whether to replace a traditional exam with an authentic project. After discussing the learning objectives, grading workload, student preparation, and available time, the instructional designer may recommend keeping a short foundational quiz while introducing a smaller application project. The recommendation acknowledges the relevant constraints while offering a practical solution.
Professional judgment does not require absolute certainty. It requires making informed decisions using the best available evidence and being willing to revise those decisions when new information becomes available. Saying "it depends" is useful only when it leads to that kind of thoughtful action.
Sometimes the Simplest Answer Is the Best One
Instructional designers often work with complex educational theories, detailed quality standards, and sophisticated technologies. That knowledge is important, but it can also create a temptation to recommend solutions that are more complicated than the problem requires. Experience teaches that effective instructional design does not always involve elaborate interventions.
Imagine a course where students repeatedly submit assignments in the wrong format. The instructor may assume students are not reading the directions and request additional reminders or a more detailed orientation module. Before adding new materials, an instructional designer might examine the assignment instructions and discover that the required file format appears only in a lengthy paragraph near the bottom of the page.
The solution may be as simple as placing the file requirement prominently near the submission instructions and including it in a short checklist. No new technology is necessary, and the course does not require a complete redesign. The improvement comes from understanding where the communication problem occurs.
This is another reason "it depends" can be such an important professional response. It encourages designers to examine the actual circumstances rather than assuming that every problem requires a major instructional intervention. Sometimes a complicated challenge needs a thoughtful redesign. Other times, it needs a clearer sentence.
Teaching Faculty to Think Like Designers
One of the most rewarding outcomes of instructional consultation occurs when faculty begin applying instructional design reasoning independently. Instead of asking which tool is best or which activity is most engaging, they begin asking whether an approach supports the learning objectives, meets learner needs, and provides meaningful evidence of achievement.
This shift often develops through repeated conversations. An instructional designer explains why a particular assessment is appropriate, demonstrates how feedback supports learning, or discusses the relationship between navigation and cognitive load. Over time, faculty members begin incorporating those considerations into their own decisions.
The goal is not turning every faculty member into an instructional designer. Faculty already bring disciplinary knowledge, teaching experience, and professional judgment that contribute to course development. Instead, effective consultation helps them make more informed instructional choices while respecting their academic responsibilities and autonomy.
When faculty begin asking better questions, the instructional designer's influence extends beyond a single project. The conversations contribute to stronger teaching practices, more thoughtful course development, and a shared understanding of what supports learning. That is a much greater contribution than simply recommending the right technology for one assignment.
Final Thoughts
"It depends" may never become the answer faculty members hope to hear during an instructional design consultation. It lacks the satisfying certainty of a universal rule, and it can initially sound less helpful than a direct recommendation. However, when used thoughtfully, it reflects an important truth about teaching and learning: instructional decisions must account for the people, goals, resources, and circumstances involved.
Experienced instructional designers understand that effective practice requires more than memorizing learning theories or following a collection of design rules. It requires asking thoughtful questions, interpreting evidence, understanding constraints, and making recommendations that fit the instructional situation. Sometimes that means recommending a familiar strategy, while other situations call for a different approach. The goal is not consistency for its own sake but making decisions that support meaningful learning.
Perhaps the greatest skill is learning how to communicate this reasoning without leaving faculty feeling that their questions remain unanswered. A strong instructional designer can explain why the answer depends on context while still providing clear guidance and practical next steps. That combination of flexibility and professional judgment is what makes instructional consultation useful.
The art of saying "it depends" is not avoiding the answer. It is understanding the situation well enough to give the right one.
References
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. Jossey-Bass.
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2023). e-Learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (5th ed.). Wiley.
Ertmer, P. A., & Quinn, J. (2017). The ID casebook: Case studies in instructional design (4th ed.). Routledge.
Merrill, M. D. (2013). First principles of instruction: Identifying and designing effective, efficient, and engaging instruction. Pfeiffer.
Nilson, L. B., & Goodson, L. A. (2021). Online teaching at its best: Merging instructional design with teaching and learning research (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.