The Instructional Designer Accelerator installs ten Claude-powered skills across your whole design cycle — and puts them straight to work on a capstone project you finish in class: a real, build-ready e-learning course. 20 hours live over 5 days, in Claude Chat and Claude Code. Design cycles typically shrink 40–60%.
Instructional design is drowning in exactly the work AI is best at — synthesis, drafting, review cycles, maintenance — while the parts that need a human (judgment, empathy, stakeholder trust) get squeezed. The Accelerator flips that ratio.
Every request is "urgent." Half of them aren't even training problems — but proving that takes longer than just building the course.
SME interviews rot in a transcript folder. The knowledge is captured; turning it into a storyboard still takes you a week.
You find out content confused learners after launch. When the feedback surveys — the ones nobody reads until quarter-end — finally surface it.
Your catalog is quietly going stale. The product shipped three releases since that course launched. Nobody's checked which screenshots still match.
Each "skill" is a reusable Claude workflow you build in Claude Chat and Claude Code and keep forever — eight covering the full instructional design lifecycle, plus two built specifically for instructional designers who ship content. Across the week, you point every one of them at a single capstone project.
Every training request gets a structured five-minute interrogation: Is this a skill gap, a process failure, or a management problem wearing a training costume? Radar scores the request, drafts the clarifying questions, and gives you the evidence to push back — politely, in writing, with receipts.
Needs analysis stops being an annual event. Sentinel digests support tickets, survey verbatims, and performance data on a schedule and surfaces emerging capability gaps while they're still cheap to close — so you propose the course before the VP asks for it.
A living memory of every business partner you serve: their goals this quarter, what you promised, what they promised, and what's gone quiet. Walk into every stakeholder meeting with a brief that makes you look like you have a chief of staff. You do now.
Stop defending design decisions with "best practice says." Evidence Engine turns learning-science research into specific, cited recommendations for your exact context — spacing, practice design, modality trade-offs — so your rationale survives contact with a skeptical stakeholder.
Convene an instant design critique: a skeptical learner, a time-starved manager, an accessibility reviewer, and a hard-nosed measurement analyst — each simulated by Claude — pressure-test your sequencing, modality, and rollout plan before a single stakeholder sees it.
Dry-run your course before launch. Pilot simulates your actual learner personas — the distracted new hire, the veteran skeptic, the ESL engineer — working through your content, and flags where each one gets lost, bored, or stuck. Catch the confusion on Tuesday, not in the post-launch survey.
Feedback forms, completion rates, attendance, quiz data — merged into one weekly readout that tells you which cohorts are drifting and which content is quietly failing. The insight was always in the data; Pulse just reads it for you, every week, without being asked.
Your content ages the moment it ships. Monitor tracks the things that invalidate it — product releases, regulation changes, policy updates — against your catalog, and tells you exactly which modules need surgery and which just need a screenshot swap.
Feed it a raw SME interview transcript and your style guide; get back a structured first-draft storyboard — learning objectives, screen-by-screen treatment, narration script, and knowledge checks — in your house format. What took a week of drafting becomes an afternoon of editing.
Generate scenario-based assessments and full question banks aligned to your objectives — with plausible distractors, rationale for every option, and difficulty tiers. Forge writes to your quality bar and cites which objective each item measures, so your psychometrics story holds up.
Most AI courses hand you techniques and wish you luck. Here, every skill you install goes straight to work on one capstone project — a real e-learning course from your own backlog. You walk in Day 1 with a raw idea and an SME transcript; you walk out Day 5 with a build-ready course.
Pick a course you actually owe someone. Bring the request and one SME interview or source doc. That's your raw material — nothing polished required.
Objectives and an evidence-backed design brief, a full storyboard, a scenario-based assessment bank, and a pre-launch persona test — each produced with a skill you keep.
Storyboard, narration script, knowledge checks, and assessments — assembled and formatted to drop straight into Articulate, Rise, or your LMS. You demo it before you leave.
Each 4-hour session pairs short instruction with live building in Claude Chat and Claude Code, moving your capstone course one stage forward every day. Bring an actual SME transcript, an actual request, an actual backlog — that's the raw material. Private cohorts run the same 20 hours on your team's schedule.
| Task | Typical time | With your skills installed |
|---|---|---|
| Triage & scope a training request | 2–4 hours + meetings | ~30 min with evidence attached |
| SME transcript → first storyboard draft | 3–5 days | Same afternoon |
| Assessment bank (20 items w/ rationale) | 1–2 days | ~1 hour to generate + review |
| Pre-launch learner testing | Usually skipped | ~45 min, every launch |
| Quarterly content-staleness audit | Usually never | Runs weekly on its own prompt |
Times reflect typical graduate reports across recent cohorts; your projects and tooling will vary. The review-and-judgment time is yours forever — that's the job.
"Storyboard Sprinter changed my relationship with my backlog. I cleared two courses that had been stuck for a quarter. My manager asked what changed. Everything, is what changed."
"Persona Pilot caught a terminology gap in our onboarding course that we'd have found the hard way, from confused-customer tickets. It caught it in class. On my real course. During the exercise."
"I lead a five-person Customer Ed team and put all of us through it. The shared skill library alone was worth it — we now hand off projects mid-cycle without a two-hour context dump."
Same 20 hours, same ten skills, same capstone, same $1,497 per person. The only difference is who's in the room and when it runs.
Our scheduled 5-day format — 4 hours a day, capped at 20 seats. Build your capstone course alongside instructional designers and Customer Ed pros from other companies.
Run the full 20 hours for your team alone, on a flexible schedule that meets your team's needs — five half-days, two intensives, or weekly sessions across a month. Everyone builds a real course from your own backlog.
Training your whole team? Run a private cohort — same $1,497 per person, 20 hours, on a schedule that fits your team.
No — it replaces the parts of the job that were never the job. Synthesis, first drafts, formatting, data-reading: automated. Judgment, learner empathy, stakeholder trust, quality bar: amplified, because you finally have time for them. Graduates ship more and rubber-stamp less.
Yes — that's the point. Your capstone course is assembled to drop straight into Articulate, Rise, or your LMS. Claude Chat and Claude Code produce the thinking artifacts — storyboards, scripts, assessment banks — in whatever format your authoring tools consume. Claude doesn't replace your stack; it feeds it faster, and Day 1 tailors outputs to your house templates.
You finish a build-ready course: a scoped charter, an evidence-backed design brief, a full storyboard and narration script, knowledge checks, and a scenario-based assessment bank — assembled and formatted for your authoring tool, and persona-tested before you leave. The final authoring/publishing in your tool is the last mile you'll fly through — often in an afternoon instead of the weeks it used to take.
First drafts are genuinely strong — when Claude has your context, your style guide, and your quality rubric, which is exactly what we install. The honest framing: you're moving from author to editor. Editing a solid draft is 3–5× faster than drafting, and your standards still decide what ships.
Yes — same $1,497 per person, same 20 hours. A private cohort runs on a flexible schedule that fits your team's calendar, with capstones and examples drawn from your own catalog, and everyone keeps a shared skill library. Email us to scope one.
It depends on your plan and your policies, and we treat this seriously: Day 1 includes a data-boundaries session covering commercial terms, anonymization patterns, and what to keep out entirely. Everything we build works with sanitized data if that's your organization's line.
Completely — roughly half of each cohort is Customer Ed. Intake Radar triages feature-education requests, Persona Pilot simulates customers, Freshness Monitor tracks product releases against your academy content. Same skills, external-facing raw material.
Claude Chat and Claude Code (Anthropic's official desktop app), a laptop, and real work: one SME transcript or source doc plus a course from your backlog to be your capstone. A Claude subscription (from ~$20/month) covers everything we build. The pre-work email walks you through gathering it — about 30 minutes.
20 hours, 5 days, 10 skills, 1 finished course — or a private cohort for your team. Built on your real projects, guaranteed to work.
Pinch Training