In the Learning Innovation Network, the content is crucial: it circulates among nodes, fostering experiences in which learning happens. This relevance leads to a very common mistake: the tendency is, in fact, to start designing the course from the index, then to define the Intended Learning Outcomes and the assessment strategy. But if we think about what happens when writing a book, the index is built up as the contents take shape and we only get a clear view at the end of it. At the same time, when designing a course, we need to start from the Intended Learning Outcomes and from the assessment strategies, and then move on defining the macro and micro contents. This way, we could discover that some contents are not so useful to reach the Intended Learning Outcomes as we thought. Now, having clarified the starting point, how do we design contents? To answer this question, we need to first understand what we mean by “content”. By content we mean all the materials and resources we use to manage the traditional teaching and learning activities based on lectures, but we also mean all those contents we use to organize lessons with an active approach: contents are the input we need to provide to launch and manage all the activities but also the outputs produced by students. This is not enough. Contents are all the materials prepared to guide students outside of training hours, for example for individual study (such as bibliographies, exercises, insights and so on). Contents are also all the materials useful to explain and manage organizational aspects of the course, for example instructions on how it is organized, rules for managing the activities, and so on. Content is not simply a notion or a concept transferred during frontal teaching. There are various levels on which the teacher-designer can act in order to design useful and meaningful contents. These levels are the content type, its narrative structure, its format and sources. In this video we will have a look at the different types of content and narrative structures. There are many types of content: notions and theoretical concepts, but also processes and methods, case studies, examples, feedback and evaluations, instructions for carrying out the activities and much, much more... The possibilities are endless, but never forget that “less is more”. When designing a course, it could be useful to list all the possibilities, but then it’s necessary to stop and carry out a selection, staying focused on the Intended Learning Outcomes we defined. The second key element to keep in mind is the narrative structure: in other words, the architecture of our content. Let’s think for example, how many possible pathways we can use to visit an exhibition. Each path gives us a different perspective. In the same way, the narrative structure of content influences its reception and interpretation. The teacher, being the designer of the teaching and learning experience, is free to choose the narrative structures that are suitable to his style, but that should also facilitate the achievement of the Intended Learning Outcomes. Let’s now have a look at possible examples of narrative structures. A deductive narrative structure goes from an abstract concept to reach a practical application. On the other hand, an inductive narrative structure goes from a practical application of the theory to an abstract concept. A temporal narrative structure develops a process, a fact, over time. A thematic narrative structure on the other hand, focuses on a specific topic, analyzing it within its geographical context or within a temporal dimension, etc... Another narrative structure could be one that operates through questions and answers, so it focuses on questions or specific problems, analyzing various solutions in order to reach a systemic solution that considers all the solutions that have been identified. Finally, the last example could be the rhizomatic narrative structure, that involves various points of access to content with non-predefined paths. Going back to Bloom's Revised Taxonomy, it is possible to create a link to the various levels of the Taxonomy and the possible narrative structures. For example, the first one is the “remember” level: we could link it to a deductive narrative structure. The second level is the “understand” level: we could link it to a thematic narrative structure. The third level tied to application: so it is easy to link it to an inductive narrative structure and so on... until we reach the last level, which is the one of creation. Here we could create a link with the rhizomatic narrative structure. These are only examples of the possible links between narrative structures and the various levels of Bloom's Revised Taxonomy and they help understand how the various innovative structures can support us in achieving the Intended Learning Outcomes. As we have seen, there are many choices we have to make when designing a content and specifically its type and narrative structures. Furthermore, We need to connect these choices with the format of the content and source to be used.