A misunderstood profession: The silent struggle behind the screen
If you’re an instructional designer (ID), you’ve probably heard some version of this.
“The PowerPoint is already finished. Can you make it look better?”
“You’re an engineer, right?”
“I just decide how to structure the course because I know my students.”
These phrases may seem innocuous, but they reveal deeper issues in higher education and corporate learning alike. Many people still don’t understand what instructional designers actually do.
Instructional design as a profession is often mistaken for graphic design, technical support, or digital formats. However, the purpose is not to make the slides beautiful. It’s about designing the way people learn. If that expertise is misunderstood or ignored, the entire learning experience suffers.
why misconceptions exist
Instructional design as a profession sits at the intersection of education, technology, and psychology, fields that naturally have little overlap. Instructional designers transform research into experience, theory into engagement, and content into results. But here’s the problem. When instructional design is invisible, it is often underestimated. Several factors contribute to this ongoing misconception.
The work is behind the scenes.
When the course is going well, few people think about why. When your LMS is intuitive, ratings are tailored, and navigation is seamless, it feels effortless. This means that designers’ contributions often go unnoticed. Job titles vary widely.
“Learning Technician,” “Course Developer,” “Designer,” “Consultant,” and “Specialist” are similar titles, but each institution has different responsibilities. Without consistent role definitions, everyone assumes that ID is a “bit of everything.” Teachers are not trained in science.
Most instructors know their subject matter deeply, but have never studied how people learn in a digital space. This gap often leads to a “just upload the content” mentality instead of co-designing engagement and accessibility. Organizational hierarchies foster confusion.
Instructional designers are too often placed under the umbrella of IT or administrative departments rather than academic departments, making it difficult to be seen as equal partners in course quality.
result? Instructional design is an important and underappreciated profession. Consultations often came too late, provided too little substance, or were asked to solve problems that they were not authorized to prevent.
How boundary overstepping manifests itself
If you don’t fully understand instructional design, you often cross boundaries without realizing it.
Faculty avoid design instruction.
They insist on layouts and ratings that ignore criteria for accessibility, cognitive load, or quality issues. Administrators abuse design time.
Pile on last-minute requests (“Please add this compliance module”) without understanding the workload or impact. Leaders reduce identity to support staff.
Designers get drawn into troubleshooting LMSs and editing captions instead of focusing on education and experience design.
Over time, this lowers morale and damages relationships. Instructional designers stop feeling like educators and start feeling like pushers of buttons. However, this is not to be blamed. Most of these excesses come not from arrogance but from ignorance. A person cannot respect what he does not understand.
What is actually at stake?
Misconceptions about instructional design don’t just frustrate designers. It weakens institutions. When ID expertise is not valued:
The quality of the course becomes unstable. This will unnecessarily increase the workload of teachers. Students encounter learning environments that are confusing and difficult to access. Innovation stagnates.
Instructional design is not a luxury. It’s insurance against poor pedagogy. Every hour you spend designing can save you dozens of hours of student confusion, technical errors, and later grading headaches.
From “collaborators” to “collaborators”: Redefining relationships
It’s time for educational institutions to shift the way they view instructional design from a service function to a strategic partnership. It actually looks like this:
Traditional view
Instructors provide content. The designer formats it. Designers are “technicians”. Designers join projects late. Design is task-based.
collaborative view
Teachers and designers collaborate to design outcomes, assessments, and learning flows. Designers are trained architects based on cognitive science. Designers are included in the planning stage to create structure and flow. Design is results-based.
Everyone benefits when you treat instructional design as a strategy rather than a service. Teachers acquire teaching partners. Students will have a richer and more equitable learning experience. Institutions believe that course evaluation, retention, and scalability will be enhanced.
How instructional designers protect professional boundaries
Respect doesn’t just happen. It comes from design. Instructional designers can (and should) take proactive steps to define professional boundaries while maintaining active collaboration.
Clarify roles early on
At project kickoff, define who owns what, including learning objectives, assessment decisions, and content delivery. Use the simple RACI matrix (Responsible, Accountable, Consult, Informed) to outline your expectations.
document the process
A written workflow or course development agreement sets timelines and boundaries. Turn subjective requests into clear deliverables.
educate diplomatically
If someone goes too far, respond with the intention of teaching them. “That approach can make your course less accessible. Here’s why and how to fix it.” Professional patience strengthens authority without confrontation.
Track your impact
Collect data for course improvement, student feedback, and time savings. Nothing commands more respect than measurable evidence.
advocate upward
Share success stories with leaders. Advocate for representation on curriculum committees, technology decisions, and strategic planning.
How can educational institutions solve it?
Administrators and leaders play an important role in legitimizing instructional design as a profession.
1. Standardize roles and titles
Clarify what “instructional designer” means to your institution and align job descriptions with recognized competencies (e.g., Learning Guild and Educause competencies).
2. Include identity in governance and decision-making
Instructional designers should be present when discussing online learning quality, course policies, and AI integration.
3. Investing in continuous development
Support professional memberships, certifications, and conference attendance. A designer who continues to grow.
4. Build visibility
Instructional Design Showcase has won awards for faculty meetings, newsletters, and leadership reports. Recognition breeds respect.
5. Measure and celebrate high-quality course outcomes
Connect instructional design metrics like accessibility compliance and increased engagement to your organization’s goals. “Nice to have” becomes “necessary”.
The future of the profession: Visibility equals value
Instructional design is now an integral part of higher education. The rapid adoption of AI, adaptive learning, and micro-credentials has made learning architectures more complex than ever. Institutions that still view designers as “support” are falling behind. Tomorrow’s best educational institutions will:
Integrate instructional design with each new program launch. Position ID as a strategic partner in innovation and faculty success. We recognize that design expertise is equally important as subject matter expertise.
Once that happens, instructional designers won’t have to fight for visibility. The impact is self-evident.
conclusion
Instructional designers don’t want applause. They want a partnership. They want their expertise to be seen as part of the learning equation, not an afterthought. So the next time someone hands you a bunch of slides and says, “Please make it look better,” you might as well invite them to say, “Let’s make it work better together.”
