I design learning that changes how people perform.

Designing learning that changes performance.

I've led training, instructional design, and quality functions inside large, regulated operations — healthcare, insurance, and high-volume contact centers — owning full-cycle learning from needs analysis through Kirkpatrick evaluation. When the field's usual tools fell short of what the work needed, I designed better ones: an AI-assisted design approach that cut course-build time up to 75%, and a knowledge platform that gets frontline staff the right answer fast. The samples below are original, interactive, and mine — instructional design first, technology in service of it.

Original course samples — built scenario-first

Fully interactive, fully original pieces on neutral topics. Each is built the way adults actually learn: short, scenario-driven, with feedback at the moment of decision and a knowledge check that teaches rather than tests. Click any one and try it.

Curious how one comes together? View the storyboard behind “New Manager Essentials” → — the design document that maps the objectives, screens, interactions, and assessments before a line of the course is built.

Rise 360 course samples

Documentation samples — from training guides to developer docs

Years of training guides, quick-reference guides, and SOPs taught me the user-facing half of technical writing; these samples show the developer-facing half, documented from the source of my own production software. Every sample was produced through a verification pipeline I built: each claim is fact-checked against the source material, style-linted, and review-gated before it publishes — the review trail travels in the document itself.

L&D problems I solved at the root

Every L&D team hits the same walls: build cycles too slow, assessments that measure recall instead of capability, knowledge no one can find. I treated those as instructional-design problems — and solved them. Same learning judgment, one step further.

Process case studies — my method, tool by tool

Each one is a real L&D problem walked through the way I actually approach it — the framework that governs the decision, and how I use AI to move faster without cutting rigor. AI drafts the first pass; the judgment stays mine, and the method carries to whatever tools a team already has.

The instructional-design tools I built — 60 seconds each

Two short walkthroughs of AI I designed for the learning lifecycle: generating a full, framework-based course from a plain-language need, and proving the learning actually transferred with an AI oral-defense assessment. The design judgment stays human — the AI does the first-draft heavy lifting.

The platforms I built — live and functional

What began as tools to automate the tedious parts of my own instructional-design work became a suite of seven live, AI-powered platforms — built solo. Four serve learning and development directly. Three more — a multi-industry business platform, a caregiver-support product, and an AI photography coach — show the same build capability reaching well beyond L&D. Every one is live; click through and try it.

Frameworks, standards, and the stack I work in

The methods behind the work, the standards I build to, and the tools I design across — authoring, media, LMS, and delivery. AI accelerates the drafting; the frameworks keep it sound.

Accessibility is design, not a checklist.

I design to WCAG 2.2 AA and the principles of Universal Design for Learning — because the choices that help learners with disabilities make the experience clearer for everyone.

Where I've done the work

A summary of real programs and results — the story, without the protected material.

From learning designer to builder.

On paper, “instructional designer” and “software developer” look like two different people. They’re not — at least not anymore. Here’s how one became the other.

I came up through software startups, where wearing every hat meant earning a seat in product and design decisions — testing, demoing, and shaping roadmaps as the voice of the customer. That product and UX foundation shaped the next fifteen years: leading training, instructional design, and quality inside large, regulated operations, always asking not just whether a course was finished, but whether it actually changed what people could do.

The one thing that always stood between my ideas and real, working tools was code. AI removed that wall — and I put it straight to the test. Teaching myself as I went, I designed and built a suite of live, AI-powered products in a single stretch:

An authoring platform, an assessment engine, a knowledge base, a course-design tool, a multi-industry business platform, a caregiver-support product, and an AI photography coach — plus a library of technical documentation written from my own production code.

Here’s the part that connects the two halves: the hard part of building was never the code. It was the judgment — the research, the design decisions, the domain rigor, the quality bar — and that is exactly what fifteen years in learning and development trains you to do. AI handled the execution; the thinking stayed mine. So this isn’t a career change. It’s a learning designer who can finally build the things he used to only be able to specify. AI didn’t make me a creator — it unleashed the one I already was.