Ten years of hands-on mastery, built into a curriculum for the next 180 technicians.

Reframing the problem

This isn't a knowledge gap. It's a transfer gap — between ten-plus years of hands-on expertise and a network that needs it to be repeatable.

Who we're designing for

Content complexity mapping

Using Merrill's content-type categories against the four movement tracks — this shapes how heavily each track leans on demonstration versus explanation.

Content type	Quartz	Entry automatic	Complex automatic	Mechanical
Facts	High	Moderate	Moderate	Low
Concepts	Low	Moderate	Moderate	High
Procedures	High	High	High	High
Principles & judgement	Low	Low	Moderate	High

Constraints that shape the design

Constraint	Design implication
Live sessions: 3 hrs/day, 4 days/week for 6 months	Capture has to fit around live training, not add a second workload for the expert or technicians.
Scale target: 6 → 160–180 technicians over two years	Content and assessment need to work far beyond a batch of six, from day one of the design.
Cost sensitivity flagged early by JIT	Investment is sequenced by phase (see Solution Blueprint) rather than requiring everything at once.
Low prior exposure to digital learning tools	Any digital component needs near-zero-friction onboarding — large tap targets, minimal text entry, video-first.
Store network spans tier-1 to tier-3 towns	Content delivery should assume variable connectivity; design offline-capable formats where possible.

One system, two programmes, three phases

Click a stage to see what it does.

Two pathways, compared

	Technician Pathway	Trainer Track
Audience	Wider technician network, deployed in phases	1–2 shortlisted technicians per batch
Duration	Ongoing, movement-track by movement-track	Additional layer after technical mastery is reached
Content depth	Deep procedural & technical content	Same technical content, plus how to teach it
Assessment	Formal skills assessment, 360-degree review	Teaching aptitude review, Job Instruction certification
Outcome	Certified, competent technician	Certified master trainer, able to lead sessions

Delivery modalities

Modality	When it's used	Format
Instructor-led practice	Core skill-building, all levels	Live, hands-on, at the training facility
Reinforcement microlearning	After live training ends, spaced over time	Short video modules, revisited on a schedule
Just-in-time performance support	At the bench, for a specific task	Quick-reference content, searchable by task
AR-assisted practice	Standardised, repeatable procedures	Guided overlay practice — Tier 3, budget-dependent

How we'd sequence the build

Named methods, chosen for what this content actually is

Not a generic learning-design checklist — each model earns its place against a specific part of this programme.

Where each model applies

Phase	Primary models	Why
Phase 1 — Capture & standardise	Cognitive Task Analysis, Dreyfus Model	Extracting and grading tacit expertise as it's being taught live.
Phase 2 — Build the two programmes	4C/ID, Job Instruction (TWI)	Designing whole-task technician curriculum and the trainer curriculum, in parallel.
Phase 3 — Measure & improve	Kirkpatrick + Phillips ROI, spaced repetition	Evaluating outcomes and scheduling reinforcement, feeding back into the next ADDIE cycle.

Design commitments we're holding ourselves to

• Capture happens at the point of expertise, not reconstructed afterward from memory.
• Every assessment evaluates doing, not just knowing.
• Content is built for the 180-technician end state from day one, not retrofitted later.
• Teaching ability is assessed and certified separately from technical mastery.
• Every reinforcement module is retrieval practice, not a re-watch.
• Design assumes variable connectivity and low prior exposure to digital tools.