Course Structure Pipeline

The course structure pipeline transforms a topic and audience profile into a fully designed course outline with section-level blueprints ready for content generation. It runs after the Audience and Depository pipelines and consists of 6 steps.

Pipeline overview

flow_audience_analyze          flow_depository_fill
        ↓                              ↓
        └──────────────────────────────┘
                         ↓
         flow_course_structure_concept      ← Step 1: Course concept
                         ↓
           flow_course_structure_plan       ← Step 2: Bloom's-aligned outline
                         ↓
          flow_course_structure_design      ← Step 3: Content plan with types & formats
                  ↙               ↘
flow_course_structure_     flow_course_structure_
  feedback_learner           feedback_expert       ← Step 4: Parallel review
                  ↘               ↙
          flow_course_structure_refine      ← Step 5: Improved final outline
                         ↓
              Section content generation

Step 1 — Concept (flow_course_structure_concept)

Inputs: audience_profile, pain, transformation, learning_objectives, depository, course_complexity, reasoning Output: Markdown — course concept document

Analyzes the target audience and topic to design the course concept. Defines:

• Three core frameworks or concepts anchored in the depository
• Bloom's complexity alignment (Beginner: ONE framework in depth; Intermediate: foundational + complementary)
• A narrative persona with a random European name (via how_to_pick_random_name injection) whose story threads through the entire course

Key constraints:

• Always use established, research-backed frameworks from organizational psychology, management, or communication studies
• Never invent terms or pseudo-frameworks
• At Beginner level: cover origins, supporting research, misconceptions, and limits of the framework

Step 2 — Plan (flow_course_structure_plan)

Inputs: course_conception (Step 1 output), learning_objectives, audience_profile, depository, course_complexity Output: Markdown — structured course outline with module/topic blueprints

Structures the concept into a Bloom's-progressive outline. Each topic gets a Blueprint with 5 fields:

Also produces a Narrative Spine (3–5 sentences) before the outline: persona, context, central conflict, stakes, desired outcome.

Key constraints:

• Bloom's progression must be explicit and sequential across modules
• Introduce each framework at full scope before narrowing
• No end-to-end projects
• Module count and topic count are fixed from this step onward

Step 3 — Design (flow_course_structure_design)

Inputs: course_outline (Step 2 output), thinking (Step 2 reasoning), audience_profile, depository, types_list, formats_list + injections Output: Markdown — full content plan with sections per topic

Expands each topic into a list of sections. Each section gets:

• Title — unique, sentence case
• Type — from enabled types_list
• Format — from enabled formats_list
• Blueprint — a self-contained, extensively scoped prompt for an independent LLM author
• Reasoning — why this section matters for this topic

Critical design rule — blueprint independence: Different authors, each isolated from the others, will generate each section's content. The blueprint must be self-contained: it cannot assume the author has read adjacent sections. All factual anchors, concept definitions, and scope boundaries must be explicit inside the blueprint.

Injections used: structure_instructions, naming_instructions, assessments_instructions

Runtime variables: types_list, formats_list (generated from enabled rows in the source Excel — not static injections)

Key constraints:

• Prefer more small sections over fewer large ones
• Module and topic count from Step 2 must be preserved exactly — do not merge, omit, or add

Step 4a — Learner feedback (flow_course_structure_feedback_learner)

Inputs: course_outline (Step 3 output), target_persona, audience_profile, pain, transformation, learning_objectives Output: Markdown — learner perspective feedback Runs in parallel with: Step 4b

Simulates a real learner reviewing the course outline. The model adopts the target persona: tired, low motivation, but genuinely wanting to grow. Evaluates:

• Topic progression clarity and logical flow
• Concept linkage and coherent storyline
• Knowledge gaps and factual errors
• Realism of examples
• Distribution and variety of sections
• Presence of a culminating moment
• Scores: consistency (1–10), curiosity hooks (count), overall (0–100)

No injections. Pure roleplay — the model is the learner, not the designer.

Step 4b — Expert feedback (flow_course_structure_feedback_expert)

Inputs: course_outline (Step 3 output), types_list, formats_list + injections Output: Markdown — expert instructional design audit Runs in parallel with: Step 4a

Conducts a rigorous structural and pedagogical audit across five areas:

1. Structural accuracy — subject matter logic, module sequence, transitions
2. Concept lifecycle — introduction placement, depth balance, reinforcement
3. Completeness — missing components, theoretical grounding, surface vs. deep
4. Quality — terminology consistency, formatting, instructional design standards
5. Advancement — what would make the course suitable for a more advanced audience

Delivers: score (0–100), detailed list of identified mistakes, concrete improvement recommendations.

Injections used: structure_instructions, naming_instructions, assessments_instructions

Step 5 — Refine (flow_course_structure_refine)

Inputs: feedback_learner (4a), feedback_expert (4b), course_outline (Step 3), types_list, formats_list + injections Output: Markdown — improved final course outline + list of changes

Synthesizes both feedback streams and produces the definitive course outline. Applies expert suggestions for depth and theoretical grounding. Key upgrade rules:

• New frameworks must be evidently connected to the core framework
• Core framework explained fully; supporting frameworks explained partly, in strong connection
• If an additional framework does not strengthen the course — refuse it

Blueprint hardening — all blueprints are upgraded to be unambiguous for independent authors:

Injections used: structure_instructions, naming_instructions, assessments_instructions

Shared variables

Shared injections

See Course Structure Injections for full content and rules.