Learning Science vs Ad Hoc Learning Design

Developers should learn Learning Science to create more effective educational software, training modules, and user onboarding experiences, as it provides insights into cognitive load, memory retention, and motivation meets developers should use ad hoc learning design when they need to create training or documentation on the fly, such as for onboarding new team members, addressing a critical bug, or adapting to sudden changes in project requirements. Here's our take.

Learning Science

Nice Pick

Developers should learn Learning Science to create more effective educational software, training modules, and user onboarding experiences, as it provides insights into cognitive load, memory retention, and motivation

Pros

• It is particularly valuable for roles in edtech, corporate training, UX design for learning applications, and when building adaptive learning systems or gamified educational content
• Related to: instructional-design, cognitive-psychology

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Ad Hoc Learning Design

Developers should use Ad Hoc Learning Design when they need to create training or documentation on the fly, such as for onboarding new team members, addressing a critical bug, or adapting to sudden changes in project requirements

Pros

• It's ideal for agile or DevOps contexts where formal training cycles are too slow, allowing teams to respond quickly to evolving needs and reduce downtime
• Related to: instructional-design, agile-methodology

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Learning Science is a concept while Ad Hoc Learning Design is a methodology. We picked Learning Science based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

The Bottom Line

Learning Science wins

Based on overall popularity. Learning Science is more widely used, but Ad Hoc Learning Design excels in its own space.