DDES9911 Chap.5 Planning an Immersive Program
Planning an Immersive Program
A learning management plan explains how learners enter, practise, progress, receive feedback, demonstrate performance and return for retention or retraining. This chapter connects task decomposition, scaffolding, repetition, frequency, duration and formative or summative assessment.
It also makes operational ownership, technical support, access, scheduling and program review part of the educational design rather than details left until launch.
What this chapter covers
- 01
Task decomposition
- 02
Scaffolding and prompt fading
- 03
Repetition, frequency and duration
- 04
Formative and summative stages
- 05
Progression evidence
- 06
Retention and retraining
- 07
Delivery ownership and review
Worked example · free
Plan progression for pedestrian awareness
- 1Set prerequisites, orientation and accessibility arrangements before the first scenario.
- 1Sequence guided practice, varied repetition and removal of prompts.
- 1Define a summative scenario and the evidence required for progression.
- 1Add a later retention check and a route for program revision.
Key terms
- Task decomposition
- Breaking a complex task into components for focused practice before reintegration.
- Scaffolding
- Temporary support that is withdrawn as independent capability develops.
- Formative stage
- A learning stage where evidence guides feedback and another attempt.
- Summative stage
- A defined point where evidence supports an overall performance judgement.
- Retention check
- A later performance check examining whether learning persists over time.
Planning an Immersive Program FAQ
How should repetition be planned?
Repetition should vary relevant conditions and respond to evidence rather than use a universal fixed count. Specify duration, frequency, fatigue safeguards and the behaviour required for progression. Repeating one unchanged scene can reward memorisation instead of adaptable performance.
When should a task be decomposed?
Decompose a task when focused practice reduces irrelevant complexity and supports a difficult component. State when pieces are recombined into whole-task performance, because isolated success does not prove that the learner can coordinate the complete authentic activity.
What makes a plan operational?
An operational plan identifies prerequisites, resources, scheduling, access, support, evidence, progression, feedback, ownership and review. Another delivery team should be able to understand what happens, why it happens and which evidence changes the next step.
How should retention be checked?
Choose a delay that is meaningful for the real task, then test the same underlying capability with changed details rather than replaying the memorised scenario. Record whether prompts, equipment and team support match the intended claim. If performance decays, diagnose which component was lost and adjust spacing or follow-up practice.
A later confidence survey alone cannot establish retention because it does not demonstrate the required action.
Assessment move
Draw the program as a timeline from preparation to retention. For every stage, record purpose, learner activity, support, evidence, progression rule and owner. Check that prompt fading is visible and that assisted performance cannot be mistaken for independence. Compare one whole-task and one part-task route, then justify the chosen sequence.
Add operational failure modes such as access, device, network or staffing constraints and explain the fallback. End with the review mechanism that can change the program after evidence from delivery. Convert the timeline into a delivery table with columns for prerequisite, resource, responsible role, evidence and contingency. Walk through the table with someone who did not design the simulation.
If they cannot tell what happens after a learner struggles, a device fails or a session is missed, the management plan is incomplete. Test progression rules with three imaginary learners: one who succeeds immediately, one who improves after feedback and one who repeats a critical error. The plan should provide a proportionate next step for each without defining competence as attendance.
State maximum session duration and recovery conditions when fatigue or immersion discomfort can affect evidence. Then examine spacing. Explain why practice is concentrated or distributed and how a later retention check differs from immediate summative performance. A risky skill may require retraining triggered by observed performance, elapsed time or both. Keep those triggers explicit.
Separate learner feedback from program feedback. The learner needs an actionable next step; the design team needs patterns that may indicate invalid cues, poor sequencing or support burden. Name who receives each report and who may authorise a change.
Close the section by showing how Weeks 7 to 10 attach to the plan: instructor roles deliver it, debriefing interprets experience, assessment supports decisions and analytics guide review.
Working through Planning an Immersive Program in DDES9911? Sia is AskSia’s AI Education tutor — ask any DDES9911 Planning an Immersive Program question and get a clear, step-by-step explanation grounded in how DDES9911 is taught and assessed. Read this chapter free, then take your hardest questions to Sia.