My organization set out to build a learning platform with a simple goal: let learners sign up for online courses whenever they wanted to. Everything would be **completely asynchronous**, meaning learners could start, stop, and finish a course on their own schedule. There would be no instructors and no peers. Several learners enrolling at the same time was up to luck. That flexibility is great, but it comes with a big drawback: **lack of interaction.** In synchronous courses, you have an instructor to guide you and peers to learn alongside. In an asynchronous format, especially when it’s self-paced, there’s usually no one to interact with. That can make courses feel impersonal, and that often discourages learners from completing them. --- #### The problem Here’s where the design challenge came in: since there were no instructors and no peers, instructional designers **avoided discussions**. Who will learners discuss with? --- #### What I did Instead of accepting this limitation, I introduced discussions **through two creative solutions:** ##### 1. Reframing discussions as “prompts for future learners” Instead of real-time conversations, I positioned discussions as **knowledge passed forward**, **leaving behind insights** for others who might take the course later. Before the courses officially launched, I **seeded the discussions** by posting example comments, and when learners joined, they were asked to: 1. Respond to an existing comment. 2. Leave a new comment for those who would come after them. This small change turned the discussion forum into a **living knowledge base.** Each cohort of learners built on the contributions of those who came before, creating a sense of continuity and indirect interaction even without real-time conversation. ##### 2. Using AI chatbots The second solution was more experimental: **AI-powered chatbots trained on the course material.** These chatbots acted like a discussion partner. Learners could engage in a back-and-forth with the bot, answering prompts and receiving feedback. Their responses were graded based on the interaction, giving structure and accountability to the learning process. The result: learners got the experience of a **guided dialogue** around the course content, without needing a live instructor. It wasn’t a replacement for human connection, but it added structure, accountability, and interactivity—three things most self-paced courses desperately lack. --- #### Result - **Discussions became sustainable** even without live instructors, because learners were interacting indirectly with both past and future participants. - **AI-powered conversations** allowed learners to engage in dialogue, something typically missing in self-paced courses. - Overall, asynchronous courses felt less isolating, more engaging, and better aligned with our need for interaction. --- #### Why this matters Asynchronous learning doesn’t have to mean isolated learning. By reframing discussions and experimenting with AI-driven interactions, I was able to make courses more engaging and meaningful, even without instructors or peers. Constraints often push us to be more innovative. The best solutions come not from ignoring limitations, but from **rethinking what interaction can look like.**