Instructional Designers,L&D Teams,Educators,Course Owners,Training Leads
Prepare the Required Inputs listed in the Workflow Prompt. Use as much detail as necessary.
1. Copy the Workflow Prompt.
2. Paste it into your AI tool.
3. Replace the "Required Inputs"
4. Run the prompt.
Get access to this workflow and 1000+ others designed to save hours and get better results with AI.
You are a senior instructional designer. Your task is to create a practical instructional design blueprint for one course, module, workshop, or learning programme before detailed content development begins.
###Required Input
Learning Project: [Describe the course, module, workshop, or programme, e.g. "manager onboarding workshop for first-time supervisors"]
Learning Need: [Explain why this learning is needed and what problem it should solve]
Target Learners: [Describe roles, experience, motivation, prior knowledge, access needs, and constraints]
Desired Outcomes: [Describe what learners should be able to do after completing the learning]
Delivery Format: [e.g. live workshop, self-paced course, blended programme, cohort-based training]
Duration and Schedule: [Total time, sessions, pacing, deadlines, or completion window]
Required Content: [Mandatory topics, policies, skills, standards, or source material]
Assessment or Success Measures: [How learning or performance will be evaluated]
Constraints: [Budget, tools, facilitator availability, class size, accessibility, language, compliance, or timeline]
Tone: [Preferred tone, e.g. "professional, practical, learner-centred"]
###Input Validation
Review the inputs before creating the blueprint. If the need, learner profile, outcomes, duration, delivery format, or constraints are missing or vague, ask specific clarification questions. Pause and wait for clarification before producing the blueprint.
###Instructions
Create a design blueprint, not finished lesson content. Focus on structure, sequencing, learner experience, assessment logic, and development guidance.
Clarify the learning problem and distinguish it from an information-sharing request. If training alone may not solve the stated problem, flag the limitation and suggest supporting actions.
Translate desired outcomes into measurable learning outcomes that fit the duration and format.
Structure the learning journey from entry point to completion. Include orientation, prerequisite support, core instruction, guided practice, feedback, independent application, assessment, and reinforcement where appropriate.
Prioritise content. Separate essential content from supporting reference material and optional enrichment so the experience does not become overloaded.
Design activities that require learners to apply, decide, practise, explain, create, or reflect, not just consume information.
Include assessment and feedback points that match the outcomes. Avoid assessments that only test recall if the outcome requires application or performance.
Address accessibility, motivation, pacing, facilitation needs, and implementation risks.
Keep the blueprint realistic for a small team using common documents, slides, LMS pages, or live sessions.
###Output
Project Overview: purpose, learners, format, and constraints.
Learning Outcomes: measurable outcomes with scope notes.
Course Architecture: modules or sessions with sequence and rationale.
Learning Experience Plan: module/session, objective, key content, learner activity, practice, feedback, and assessment.
Assessment Strategy: evidence of learning, success criteria, and feedback approach.
Content Prioritisation: essential, reference, optional, and remove/defer.
Development Checklist: assets to create, facilitator notes, learner materials, and review steps.
Implementation Risks: likely issues and mitigation actions.
Blueprint Summary: concise handoff for stakeholders or developers.
Include a lean version of the blueprint for teams with limited development time.
Project Title: Defending the Perimeter: Practical API Security for Engineers
Learning Need: Recent security audits revealed a 40% increase in broken object-level authorization (BOLA) vulnerabilities across our core products. Engineering teams are shipping feature code rapidly but consistently missing critical access control checks, risking data exposure. This blueprint addresses the root behavior by embedding security verification patterns directly into the active writing phase of the development lifecycle.
Target Learners: Mid-level mid-career Full-Stack and Backend Software Engineers. They possess high technical competence in writing application logic but view security protocols as a slow, separate compliance gate rather than an integrated coding habit.
Format & Duration: A 3-week asynchronous, cohort-based technical training program requiring approximately 3 hours of learner engagement per week.
Constraints: Must utilize the internal GitLab CI/CD environment for all practical application testing. Budget limits external tooling; training must be delivered natively through the existing company Learning Management System (LMS).
By the end of this program, learners will be able to:
| Unit / Module | Core Focus | Sequence Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Module 1: The Anatomy of a Breach | Deconstructing real-world exploit payloads. | Establishes immediate personal relevance and technical curiosity by showing exactly how easy it is to exploit basic authorization oversights. |
| Module 2: Defensive Coding Patterns | Writing context-aware middleware validation rules. | Moves from threat recognition to active resolution, providing concrete code structures to fix the threats discovered in Module 1. |
| Module 3: Automating the Guardrails | Writing automated security regression tests in CI/CD pipelines. | Ensures long-term behavior change by shifting safety metrics away from manual developer memory toward automated system gates. |
Get access to all workflows, across every sector, with structured systems built for better results.