1The framing text first led me to look back on my years of experience in educational technology. It was in the early 90s that I discovered this area, which has been filling my schedule ever since. The systematic and systemic planning of learning systems was a discovery for me even though I had just completed a bachelor’s degree in teaching. I told myself at the time that educational technology, and more particularly the basics of instructional design, should be part of any university education in teaching. I still think so today and I am also convinced that these basics should be part of the induction training of any new teacher. I was particularly fascinated by the potential contribution of cognitive sciences to training planning (Brien, 1990) and by a transformation of roles that seemed urgent to me at the time: from the teacher transmitting knowledge to the teacher guide or mentor, which supports the active student in his learning.

1. Evolution of practices in educational
technology and distance learning
Int
1The framing text first led me to look back on my years of experience in educational
technology. It was in the early 90s that I discovered this area, which has been filling my
schedule ever since. The systematic and systemic planning of learning systems was a
discovery for me even though I had just completed a bachelor’s degree in teaching. I
told myself at the time that educational technology, and more particularly the basics of
instructional design, should be part of any university education in teaching. I still think so
today and I am also convinced that these basics should be part of the induction training
of any new teacher. I was particularly fascinated by the potential contribution of
cognitive sciences to training planning (Brien, 1990) and by a transformation of roles
that seemed urgent to me at the time: from the teacher transmitting knowledge to the
teacher guide or mentor, which supports the active student in his learning.
2At the time, there was a lot of talk about individualizing the learning process, meeting
the individual needs of learners. This responsibility rested primarily with the teacher,
placed in the position of the instructional designer or, more rarely, with an instructional
designer who worked in concert with the teacher. In this line of thought, I remembered
that in 1995, Philipe Marton, one of the teachers who marked my career, had
announced to us that the three words that would characterize the years to come in
educational technology would be: miniaturization, power and instantaneity. Years later,
we can say that he was not wrong. You can see this by reading the very recent special
issue of ETRD on the evolution of technologies and learning environments (Martin,
Dennen, and Bonk, 2020). It made me wonder what three words could characterize the
next few years in educational technology. I will come back to that.

2. Educational technology
3A little later during this decade, a great need to stabilize
or standardize practices, to define the field of educational
technology (again!), To define our identity as educational
designers persisted.
4I must admit that I was very scared at the time of finding myself at the “MacDo of
training”. The trend towards standardization worried me. The latter seemed to me to be
in total contradiction with the practices of individualization, so highly valued during my
training. However, “standardization” promised to compensate for the variability in the
quality of the training courses developed. It, therefore, presented certain advantages,
which could only be unanimous.
5Without going into the details of my memories, I would like to emphasize here that, to
my knowledge, the quest for identity has always characterized practitioners of
educational technology. From my point of view, I have the impression that the
individualization/standardization, flexibility/rigor paradoxes have preoccupied
instructional designers for at least 30 years. Indeed, the questions and the ways of

3. approaching the problems have changed over the years, but I believe that these two
paradoxical and fundamental challenges have always remained in the background.
6Moreover, Peraya and Peltier (2020) recall the many questioning of the foundations of
educational engineering and the recurrence of certain questions.
7Certain principles have remained essential over the years. For example, still today and
with good reason, Henri (2019, p. 233) reminds us that “[educational engineering]
applies the fundamental principles which are those of coherence and systematicity”.
8Villot-Leclercq (2020, § 19), for her part, speaks of “educational engineering of
adjustment for a cuisine spiced up with questioning at the time of assessments”. This
made me wonder: have we done enough reviews? Or have we, in recent years, been so
busy defining ourselves and our methods and technologies that we have overlooked the
balance sheets?
9Fortunately, we can note an increase in research based on design (or “ Design-Based
Research ”) (Collective DBR, 2003; Sandoval and Bell, 2004) which allows us to hope
that such research will allow us to draw up well-documented assessments. , in
collaboration with practitioners, and thus establish principles and guidelines based on
good and less good practice. At the time of revising this text, I have the pleasure of
reading Reeves and Lin (2020) who make a similar observation and develop it in an
article entitled ” The research we have is not the research we need “. They point out that
educational technology research has focused a lot on the “things” [often the
technologies] and not enough on the “[real] problems” that teachers and learners face.
In this issue, Bonfils (2020) also underlines the importance of sharing approaches
between teaching teams “to learn from good practices and respect quality processes”.
Baron (2020) also says that it is imperative to carry out research, in particular about the
models of design and production of resources and “the psychic dynamics at work in the
use of environments managing distance”.
10I was invited to contribute to this issue before the pandemic. The reflection I have just
mentioned had started at that time. Like other colleagues who have already participated
in the debate, my contribution will now be tinged with this remarkable experience of
helping colleagues (many of whom were against distance training (FAD) to take the turn
towards FAD imposed by pandemic and also, by necessity, to take a more concrete
interest in pedagogical design.I can no longer detach myself from this experience which
taught me a lot and made me think.
11I, therefore, allow me, by answering a few questions from the reframing text, to share
thoughts and experiences in connection with the evolution of educational engineering
practices. These reflections are mainly influenced by my role as director of programs in
educational technology and distance training at TELUQ University as well as by this
temporary role of “trainer-guide” in the shift towards ADF imposed by the pandemic.

4. Has the capacity of learners to demonstrate autonomy in learning become more
essential today than yesterday? (Peraya and Peltier, 2020, §2)
12In my opinion, the ability of learners to demonstrate autonomy in learning is not “more
essential” but rather different. Indeed, I have the impression that yesterday, when we
spoke of learner autonomy, we were referring to an isolated learner who had to be able
to follow along what the teacher (in his position as a designer) had meticulously put on
stage for him. At the time, this concept, therefore, referred to the ability to impose a
rhythm and a discipline that made it possible to follow the course and arrive at the end
of the course. Today, I believe that autonomy refers more directly to the skill level of the
student as a learner. Indeed, to become an effective learner, it is necessary to develop
certain skills. Certainly, the profile of the skills needed to conduct studies has evolved
over the years. For example, it is true, as Henri (2019) points out, that the abundance of
information makes it necessary to master new skills related to the use of digital
technology and the selection of information. But autonomy as such was and remains a
key to successful learning. Nowadays, it often refers to the ability of the learner to take
part in planning their learning journey. The latter is sometimes even led to specify his
learning targets, to choose educational activities that could enable him to reach them, to
self-evaluate and to take stock of his course. Reflective practice is widely exploited.
Short, the learner slowly becomes a co-designer of his training path (Maina and
González, 2016). This path, which was limited to initial training yesterday, continues
today during the various stages of life, in particular through continuing training and by
considering emerging learning, as defined by Williams, Karousou and Mackness (2011
). This is in line with the words of Henri (2019, p.231) who says that “the learner asserts
himself rather as an actor capable of defining his project and of interpreting different
roles during his apprenticeship. Its aim is to achieve autonomy, which makes it capable
of lifelong learning and thus prepares itself to contribute to society ”.continues today
during the different stages of life, in particular through continuing education and the
consideration of emerging learning, as defined by Williams, Karousou and Mackness
(2011). This is in line with the words of Henri (2019, p.231) who says that “the learner
asserts himself rather as an actor capable of defining his project and of interpreting
different roles during his apprenticeship. Its aim is to achieve autonomy, which makes it
capable of lifelong learning and thus prepares itself to contribute to society ”.continues
today during the different stages of life, in particular through continuing education and
the consideration of emerging learning, as defined by Williams, Karousou and
Mackness (2011). This is in line with the words of Henri (2019, p.231) who says that
“the learner asserts himself rather as an actor capable of defining his project and of
interpreting different roles during his apprenticeship. Its aim is to achieve autonomy,
which makes it capable of lifelong learning and thus prepares itself to contribute to
society ”.231) which says that “the learner asserts himself rather as an actor capable of
defining his project and of interpreting different roles during his learning. Its aim is to
achieve autonomy, which makes it capable of lifelong learning and thus prepares itself
to contribute to society ”.231) which says that “the learner asserts himself rather as an
actor capable of defining his project and of interpreting different roles during his
learning. Its aim is to achieve autonomy, which makes it capable of lifelong learning and
thus prepares itself to contribute to society ”.

5. 13Following this logic, at the TELUQ Education Department, we are revising our
programs in educational technology and distance training. As was the case with other
training programs, particularly in the health sciences, we have made the shift towards
programs aimed at developing skills. These revisions have led us to ask ourselves
various questions: what skills need to be developed to practice educational technology
and distance education in 2019-2020? What are students missing when they complete
their program? Do our programs have strengths recognized in practice settings? How
can we promote inclusive practices and flexibility within our programs? It was important
for us to stay abreast of the needs of the practice environments and the skills that are
sought there, but also to allow more independent learners to personalize their courses,
among other things by offering continuous registration, through choices of targeted skills
and courses adapted to their needs. among other things by offering continuous
registration, by choosing the targeted skills and courses adapted to their needs. among
other things, by offering continuous registration, by choosing the skills targeted and
courses adapted to their needs.
14These revisions first led us to draw up a repository of skills in educational technology
and distance training, which will also be the subject of a publication in the coming
months. This repository serves as a basis for the development of exit skills profiles
specific to the various programs. We have retained the vision adopted by Boucher and
Ste-Marie (2013) which makes it possible to distinguish roles, skills and tasks. Indeed,
in the exercise of a profession, we can be called upon to play different roles which
require skills allowing the execution of tasks. Thus, in the exercise of his profession, the
professional educational designer may be called upon to play, in addition to the role of
designer, the roles of educational advisor, manager or researcher, for example. The
roles retained in our framework are as follows: professional, educational advisor,
educational designer, manager /leader, researcher and facilitator. For each role, a
competency statement was formulated, components and subcomponents of
competencies were also specified. Table 1 presents the roles and associated
competency statements. Of course, this repository is called upon to evolve and the
descriptions and statements could change during the first years of use.
Table 1. Roles and skills of the educational technology and distance learning skills
framework developed by Savard, Contamines, Plante, Gérin-Lajoie and Umbriaco
(2019)
Table 1. Roles and skills of the educational technology and distance learning skills
framework developed by Savard, Contamines, Plante, Gérin-Lajoie and Umbriaco
(2019)
Zoom Original (png, 175k)
15A work of mapping the courses of our programs was then carried out, in order to
identify if the course allows the initiation, the development or the integration of the
various components of competencies. The objective of this step was also to list all the
learning, teaching and learning assessment activities. Ultimately, this mapping work will
certainly allow us to identify certain gaps and strengths in our programs and improve

6. our courses accordingly. But it also has two goals, closely linked to a question posed in
the framework text: “How to reconcile the prescriptive rigour of educational engineering
with the need to adjust to the specificities of learners and their uses?” (Peraya and
Peltier, 2020, p.21) ”. First, for the sake of rigour, It is essential to ensure the
completeness of our training programs, with regard to the different output skill profiles,
and the adequacy between the skill components and the educational activities offered.
Our second goal is flexibility and aims to allow the learner to choose courses and
activities according to the skills profile he wishes to develop. We, therefore, offer
“standard courses”, intended for learners who wish to be guided and supported towards
a predetermined output skills profile, and “adaptable courses”, within which learners can
adjust the skills profiles according to the specificities of their work. their ambitions. and
the adequacy between the competency components and the educational activities
offered. Our second goal is flexibility and aims to allow the learner to choose courses
and activities according to the skills profile he wishes to develop. We, therefore, offer
“standard courses”, intended for learners who wish to be guided and supported towards
a predetermined output skills profile, and “adaptable courses”, within which learners can
adjust the skills profiles according to the specificities of their work. their ambitions. and
the adequacy between the competency components and the educational activities
offered. Our second goal is flexibility and aims to allow the learner to choose courses
and activities according to the skills profile he wishes to develop. We, therefore, offer
“standard courses”, intended for learners who wish to be guided and supported towards
a predetermined output skills profile, and “adaptable courses”, within which learners can
adjust the skills profiles according to the specificities of their work. their ambitions.We,
therefore, offer “standard courses”, intended for learners who wish to be guided and
supported towards a predetermined output skills profile, and “adaptable courses”, within
which learners can adjust the skills profiles according to the specificities of their work.
their ambitions. We, therefore, offer “standard courses”, intended for learners who wish
to be guided and supported towards a predetermined output skills profile, and
“adaptable courses”, within which learners can adjust the skills profiles according to the
specificities of their work. their ambitions.
16We are currently working on targeting the skills needed as a learner so that we can
develop educational resources and activities that will help students move towards
independence. Also, each student registered in our programs is associated with a
professor who acts as a “tutor-program”, throughout the duration of the program, and
whose essential role is to promote this path towards autonomy.
Who are the players in engineering today and how can they be trained for tomorrow?
17Table 1 shows a program team consensus (Program Committee in Educational
Technology and Distance Learning of the Education Department of TELUQ University)
on the roles and skills that are essential today for those involved in educational
engineering and distance education. The importance given to the development of
management and collaboration skills should be emphasized since it seems to be
growing rapidly.

7. 18First of all, the analysis of job offers posted in recent years (mainly in Canada) and
the interviews conducted with collaborators from different practice environments led us
to realize the importance that skills are taking today. in management in educational
engineering practices. Indeed, we have noticed that when we seek to recruit
professional instructional designers, we often specify that the candidate must be able to
play the role of project manager. Likewise, when seeking to recruit educational
technology project managers, it is often expected that they can take part in instructional
design tasks.
19Collaborative design is identified by Basque and Baillargeon (2013) as a challenge in
the design of distance learning courses. Indeed, the authors underline that “even if he
remains the sole person responsible for the course, the professor benefits from
benefiting from the expertise and experience of other professionals (tutors, educational
professionals, programmers, computer graphics specialists, multimedia, etc.) ”. The
International Board of Standards for training, performance and instruction(IBSTIPI)
(Koszalka, Russ-Eft & Reiser, 2013) also highlighted the importance of collaborative
skills in current practices. We can therefore say without too much risk of being
contradicted that today’s engineering players must develop skills for inter-professional
collaboration. Fortunately, the development of these skills has already been the subject
of much research, particularly in the health sciences (Careau et al ., 2014; D’amour and
Oandasan, 2005), on which it is possible to base our work. . Savard, Richard, Carreau,
Perreault and Pinard (in press) have documented an educational design process to
equip the assessment, teaching and learning of interprofessional collaboration in an
authentic situation.
20In 2018, in collaboration with my colleague Josiane Basque, I conducted a survey
aimed at collecting the point of view of practitioners regarding the improvement of
training planning practices. This survey was motivated by the preparation of a chapter in
a collective work (to be published) on the renewal of educational engineering for digital
learning environments. A short online survey, shared among different communities of
Canadian and European practitioners, allowed us to collect the point of view of 69
French-speaking practitioners and 9 English-speaking practitioners. The majority of
them had more than 13 years of experience but some were just starting out in practice.
This variety contributed to the richness of the responses.The qualitative analysis of the
responses to an open question (“In your opinion, how could training design practices be
improved? Provide two or three avenues in this perspective by justifying them”) led us to
identify avenues for improvement of the following emerging [design practices]:
show more flexibility;
 give more time and value (to the trade or to instructional design tasks);
 develop continuing education tools and activities to guide practice;
 work in collaboration… intra and inter-professional;
 be closer to the field, collaborate with people from the field;
 involve the learner;

8.  improve the analysis (learning targets, context, problem identification);
 vary methods and media;
 use technology in the service of pedagogy (and not the other way around);
 develop management skills;
 evaluate training and learn, to improve.
21A chapter (Basque and Savard, in press) of the book on the renewal of educational
engineering presents a more detailed analysis of the results of this research. I will
therefore not go into details here, but it should, all the same, be underlined that some of
these tracks, like the 7 and the 10, give an impression of “déjà vu”. The fact that they
are still identified as avenues for improvement suggests that there is still room for
improvement. Other tracks bring a breath of freshness. The 1 (“Show more flexibility”),
for example, emphasizes the consideration of emerging learning (Williams et al., 2011),
the integration of the principles of universal design (Rose and Meyer, 2002), the
adoption of agile and iterative approaches (Larman, 2004), which all constitute
interesting avenues of research and renewal of engineering.
22The brief presentation of this work provides some answers to the question posed in
the reframing text: today’s engineering players come from diverse backgrounds and
professions and they must develop skills leading them to power. perform different roles.
This diversity of actors and of the roles that they must be able to play brings its share of
complexifications to the planning of their training. As I explained in answering the
previous question, our program review work is punctuated as much by the concern for
prescriptive rigour as by that of developing a flexible offer adapted to the needs of
learners.
How are we today in a dynamic that calls for an unavoidable renewal of practices?
23This question asked before the pandemic now takes on a meaning that may seem
obvious. The shift towards distance training, accelerated by the Covid19, means that we
are effectively in a dynamic which calls for an essential renewal of practices. The first
emergency manoeuvres brought to light a sometimes approximate and questionable
turn (some even spoke of a ” balancing act. ») But they nevertheless forced teachers
and learners to come together to end, at a distance, the academic year already well
advanced. While waiting for the second wave, the teachers, many of whom were very
reluctant towards FAD before the pandemic, planned a hybrid or remote fall (should I
say hybrid AND remote?). They made some great discoveries and many of them are
now talking about an impossible turnback. This is in line with what Henri (2019, p. 229)
said: “… [the changes observed] open the way to a possibility that remains to be
specified, operationalized and implemented from an institutional perspective”. … “… It is
above all not a question of instrumenting educational systems with the new tools of the
digital age while maintaining the dominant model”.I have the impression that the
pandemic has shattered the dominant model. It remains to be seen whether there will
be a real transformation of practices and whether it will be sustainable. Indeed, we must
not neglect the harmful effects that could have recourse to ADF in an emergency, out of
spite and without great efforts to adapt. We have observed two types of recourse to
ADF in times of pandemic: 1) that which is made by saying to oneself that it is
necessary to have a bad time while waiting for the return to normal and while adapting

9. as little as possible or 2) one made by those who saw the crisis as an opportunity, an
opportunity to question themselves and to transform practices in a sustainable way. On
this subject, Bonfils (2020) underlines that it is “essential to review the evaluation
methods in a sustainable manner”.
24The fact remains that the efforts to familiarize themselves with the ADF were massive
and observed on an international scale. On our side of the Atlantic, the vast majority of
the team of professors of the Education Department of TELUQ was mobilized
throughout the summer by the Ministry of Education and Higher Education of the
Government of Quebec to develop, in collaboration with professionals from TÉLUQ,
school boards and various CEGEPs, the training aimed at familiarizing all teachers in
Quebec with FAD. This training is called “I teach at a distance”. It brings together four
microprograms: Adapt, Disseminate, Support and Evaluate, which are themselves
adapted to the particularities of the different levels of education: preschool and
elementary, secondary, college and university. In all, nearly fifty people worked, in an
emergency and without counting the hours, on the development of this “survival kit” on
the basic principles of educational design (part of which I was in charge), the distribution
of remote content, remote support and the evaluation of distance learning. As of August
30, 2020, the training has 130,000 learners in 134 countries. There are other similar
initiatives elsewhere in the world. distance support and evaluation of distance learning.
As of August 30, 2020, the training has 130,000 learners in 134 countries. There are
other similar initiatives elsewhere in the world. distance support and evaluation of
distance learning. As of August 30, 2020, the training has 130,000 learners in 134
countries. There are other similar initiatives elsewhere in the world.
25We are seeing a growing interest in distance education, educational technology and
more particularly in instructional design (because a good distance course necessarily
requires a good design). The latter, which at first glance seems heavy for ordinary
teachers, seems to want to regain its letters of nobility. This interest remains fragile and
for the moment very dependent on the context of the pandemic. We must undoubtedly
propose changes in practices sparingly and adopt an iterative approach to support
these new practitioners of educational design. For seasoned instructional engineers,
this most likely means the need to embrace the simplification of processes and
methods.
26I would bet that these new adopters of educational technology and distance learning
will soon start to innovate and they will inspire us to push the boundaries. In addition,
the learners who have been at the forefront of these “learning experiences” have often
been consulted and have generously contributed to the development of ideas. Bonfils
(2020) also underlines the interest in involving students in this collective reflection. Fall
promises to be interesting and rewarding. Will we be able to make the necessary
assessments to analyze these new practices so as to transform this “unavoidable
renewal” into “sustainable renewal” of practices?

10. 27As Henri mentions (2019, p. 234): “The designer will have to accept the uncertainty
inherent in open pedagogy and freedom of choice. Institutional actors and political
decision-makers will have to overcome the conservative tendencies recognized in
educational and transformative circles ”. The need for flexibility in pedagogy, at all levels
and in all fields, is always more glaring (Bates and Sangra, 2011; Collis and Moonen,
2012; Edmundson, 2007; Gros and Maina, 2015; Savard, 2014; Savard, Bourdeau and
Paquette, 2020; Subramony, 2017).
Conclusion
28Mr. Marton was right: miniaturization, power and instantaneity have marked the
practices of educational technology in recent decades. However, these three words
mainly referred to the evolution of technological tools (which favoured individualization).
Now we (teachers, designers and learners) need to become more proficient at using
them for educational purposes. In this line of thought and on the basis of the reflections
made within the framework of this contribution, I venture to suggest three words that
could mark the next decade in educational technology: flexibility, diversity, intra and
inter-professional collaboration. As others have pointed out, I believe that we have not
yet learned to use technologies to their full educational potential. Above all, we have not
deeply adjusted our practices or our behaviour.
29While exchanging about the basics of instructional design with fellow professors from
other disciplines, to help them adapt to FAD, some told me that the pandemic had led
them to realize that they were teaching their class. same way since the ’70s and that, as
the cropping text suggests, they do not follow an explicit engineering method. These
exchanges led me to wonder if the role changes had indeed taken place. Has the
teacher really become a guide who accompanies the active learner in his learning?
Blandin (2020) presents a good example of the application of active pedagogies in
distance learning. Does today’s teacher still wish to move away from this role of
transmitting knowledge? What do students like about a good teacher? Is it not precisely,
in part, its ability to transmit its knowledge, its passions?
30These exchanges also led me to think that the “passage from craftsmanship to
standardization” did not take place in universities. As I explained earlier, however, I
believe that the pandemic offers us great opportunities for transformation. E. Villiot-
Leclercq (2020, p.4) underlines “[that in times of pandemic] the rupture of practices is
almost of the paradigmatic order as it is vast and massive and so surprising by its
anthropological scope”. It is now up to us to seize these opportunities and transform
practices, both at the application