Balancing standardisation and personalisation in curriculum design: can we achieve both?

Introduction

Have you ever sat in a curriculum planning meeting and thought to yourself, “But how do we design standardised modules and qualifications that ensure academic quality and consistency, while also offering personalised learning experiences that meet diverse student needs?”. 

In this post, we’ll explore how this tension between standardisation and personalisation has evolved at The Open University (OU) and suggest some practical ways that you can strike the right balance at your own institution. 

The challenge: why is this so hard?

At The Open University, one of our biggest challenges is scale. We’re the UK’s largest academic institution, spanning all four nations, and we’re among the biggest in Europe too. So, with nearly 200,000 students studying over 400 modules each year, finding the right balance between personalisation and standardisation is key. Our module websites need to feel supportive and tailored to individual students, while still delivering the consistency and quality you’d expect from an institution of this size.

And then there’s our open-access, distance learning model. With a social mission to be ‘open to people, places, methods and ideas’, the OU is non-selective in its undergraduate admissions, enabling students from a variety of backgrounds to obtain university education. This means that people of all ages, backgrounds and prior learning experiences choose to study with the OU for a variety of reasons, at a range of levels and pace to suit their lives. They also expect, and deserve, the flexibility to study when and where they choose.

So, how do we balance both?

A rigid, one-size-fits-all approach to curriculum design isn’t appropriate for such a diverse population of students, especially in an era where flexibility and authenticity matter more than ever. Equally, staff don’t want to feel like they’re having to ‘reinvent the wheel’ when it comes to curriculum production; nor do students want to have to try and navigate different layouts and terminology each time they register for a new module. 

As a result, the ‘Standardising Module Design’ project team was set up in early 2024, tasked with increasing consistency across modules for students at the OU, as well as reducing complexity and simplifying processes for Faculty and Professional Services staff. 

Here are some of the lessons we’ve learned along the way. 

1. Define non-negotiables clearly

   Across the sector, curriculum analysis and design is becoming increasingly complex, with an array of frameworks, toolkits and best practice to try and squeeze into modules of varying sizes (Dickinson, 2024). 

   Start by bringing together the core elements of curriculum design that are essential to comply with internal and external quality standards. For us, this included the OU’s Assessment Framework, Employability Framework, Digital Information Literacy Framework and Inclusive Curriculum Tool (covering inclusion, accessibility and sustainability), as well as providing Module Teams with clear guidance on the expected number of learning outcomes and student workload hours.

2. Build personalisation into the structure 

   Once the non-negotiable ‘foundations’ are in place, you can introduce innovative opportunities for students to personalise their learning through co-creation and authenticity. This allows students and staff to feel a sense of ownership without compromising standards or constraining the unique voice and teaching approaches of specific disciplines (EADTU, 2025).

   We described this approach to stakeholders as ‘building the classroom’ in which teaching and learning can take place in a familiar and consistent way, without dictating what should be taught. This approach also provides our module teams with the opportunity to embed authentic assessment, enabling students to focus on what matters to them most. 

3. Ask the students – and then ask them again 

   With so many students at the OU, we leaned heavily on our online Curriculum Design Student Panel – a structured, fully supported initiative that brings together over 1,400 student voices – throughout the project. This enabled us to gather their feedback on the structural layout of module websites proposed by the project team and gave them an opportunity to share their own ideas on how to further improve the consistency between modules to enhance the overall student experience. The students’ input didn’t just help us refine our approach; it played a crucial role in shaping our work from the start and even guided us in prioritising actions for future research and development.

4. Make the best use of the technology available

   Consider how to make the best use of adaptive learning platforms to personalise module content while improving quality and consistency. Remember, it’s not about trying to replace staff, it’s about giving them the right tools, guidance and time to support diverse learners.

   We started with nothing more complicated than an Excel spreadsheet, which we used to capture our ‘non-negotiable’ components. As time went on, a VLE-based ‘Module Design Toolkit’ was developed, containing flexible templates for module design as well as practical examples, student feedback and good practice. 

   And, yes, artificial intelligence (AI) tools can play a part too, for example in automating compliance and quality control checks. We are currently working with subject matter experts in employability, digital information literacy and inclusive curriculum to identify the parameters against which each of these frameworks should be assessed.

5. “Solve for one; extend to many”

   Balancing standardisation and personalisation isn’t easy – or quick – but doing so can result in a positive impact on students and staff involved in module production, particularly those with protected characteristics. What’s even better is that the impact doesn’t stop there. Designing for groups of individuals with specific needs also helps you to identify universal benefits that can be extended to a wider range of users (Gilbert, 2019).

As we have hopefully demonstrated, balancing standardisation and personalisation is a challenging but rewarding task and doing so is one of the most effective ways to help students reach their full potential (France, 2017).

Do you agree? What strategies have worked in your institution? We’d love to know what you think You can contact us at LDS-LearningDesign@open.ac.uk

Dr Tyrrell Golding is a Senior Lecturer in Education, SFHEA with over 30 years of experience teaching in informal, non-formal and formal settings. Helen Cooke is a Senior Fellow of Advance HE (SFHEA) and has over 18 years’ experience of working at The Open University in a range of Professional Services roles. Michael Collins is a Senior Learning Designer and has over 10 years of design and production experience. He is currently focused on standardising module design and using AI to identify design characteristics