Systematic review highlights gaps in learning design tools' evaluation and implementation phases, suggesting a need for improvement.
The continuous evolution of learning design (LD) necessitates a systematic review to comprehensively map the available tools that support educational practice, thereby highlighting current trends and development gaps. This study aimed to classify and analyze the features, evolution, and technological maturity of tools supporting the LD process. A Systematic Literature Review (SLR) was conducted following PRISMA guidelines, analyzing fifty-six tools identified from major academic databases based on their support level (design, implementation, evaluation), user focus, and other characteristics. The analysis revealed a clear transition from static, desktop-based applications to dynamic, web-based, and open-source platforms. Crucially, most tools heavily focus on the initial design phase, exhibiting significant deficiencies in supporting the subsequent implementation and, particularly, the evaluation phases. The findings conclude that while the LD tool landscape is diverse, its development is uneven, suggesting a critical need for future tools to offer more robust, end-to-end lifecycle support and integrate current educational technological innovations such as Generative AI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Garau et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: