Why is the Third Space so invisible?

Have you ever heard the saying, "The value of Learning Design is real but just not visible"? I have heard this sentiment echoed by many Learning Designers from many universities. But why is this the case?

From my experience and observation, major successful university-wide initiatives that pivot the Learning and Teaching course experience often have academic managers holding academics accountable for course development work. However, outside of these major projects, such structures seem to be absent in regular Learning Design projects and operations.

Course development requires tracking and reporting. Often, we report progress to our own line manager, being held accountable for work by someone who does not officially report to us (and is often swamped by competing priorities).

If we take on this project management role, it places us in a conflict of interest: collaborating with academics versus managing the completion of work. We simply don't have the authority to enforce course development work.

However, if we empower an academic's manager with the tools to track progress and sign off on Learning Design development milestones, we could positively change the dynamic of Learning Design projects. This would be accountability in the right hands.

There are numerous benefits to this approach. Here are my top five:
1. We become true collaborators with each academic, promoting engagement with the task.
2. The value of our work becomes visible to both the academic and professional staff hierarchies.
3. Academics receive recognition and feedback for their growing capabilities.
4. The project's true organisational priority and progress become transparent to all stakeholders.
5. Project expectations can be optimised to align with operational realities sooner.

Does this reflect your experience? What pros and cons do you see?

Photo by David DINTSH on Unsplash