From Design to Reflection: A Postmortem of the First Five Courses at TecNM Virtual

1. How does this project began?

At the start of Claudia Sheinbaum’s presidency in 2024, the federal government identified expanding access to higher education as a national priority. In October 2024, Secretary of Public Education Mario Delgado announced a plan to create nearly 330,000 new seats in public universities across Mexico, of which 85,000 would belong to the National Technological Institute of Mexico (TecNM). This ambitious initiative sought to respond to the growing demand for professional studies and to ensure broader opportunities for young people nationwide.

In this context, at the beginning of 2025, the Ministry of Public Education (SEP) and TecNM launched TecNM Virtual, an innovative nationwide distance education model. The first three fully online engineering programs were developed through collaboration among 18 technological institutes and over one thousand faculty members who designed and curated digital learning content. (eleconomista.com)

The admission process for these programs ran from February 28 to May 16, 2025, and the first cohort of students officially began classes on August 25, 2025. (tijuana.tecnm.mx).

On September 3, 2025, the TecNM Virtual platform was officially launched, welcoming 2,815 students to the new online programs: Industrial Engineering, Business Management Engineering, and Computer Systems Engineering . These fully accredited online degrees are open to all individuals who have completed high school, regardless of age, offering flexible learning paths, digital inclusion, virtual mobility, and curricula aligned with national needs and the demands of Industry 5.0 .

During the launch event, the Secretary of Public Education emphasized that TecNM Virtual directly responds to President Claudia Sheinbaum’s call to expand higher education coverage and ensure that more young people can access university studies . He highlighted this initiative as proof that “education is a right” and must be exercised with equity, inclusion, and social justice. (eleconomista.com).

2. What was the scope and purpose of this project?

During the initial phase of the TecNM Virtual initiative, the Technological Institute of Jalisco Online (TSJ en línea) was assigned the design of five undergraduate courses: Operations Research (Engineering in Business Management), Operations Research (Computer Systems Engineering), Numerical Methods, General Physics, and Principles of Electricity and Digital Applications. These courses were distributed directly by TecNM Virtual among participating campuses and represented fundamental building blocks from the first to the fourth semesters of the eingeniereeing programs.

Our institution acted as a collaborative workforce, contributing previous expertise in online instructional design to the national effort. For each of the five courses, TSJ en línea coordinated a team composed of four subject matter experts, one instructional designer, and one pedagogical reviewer. This structure ensured that each course combined academic rigor, technological resources, and a strong pedagogical alignment with the TecNM Virtual educational model.

The main objective was to respond to the national mandate of creating quality digital learning experiences that could be replicated and scaled in subsequent phases. Through these courses, the project sought to:

Ensure curricular coherence by aligning learning outcomes with the competencies required in the professional profiles of engineering students.
Pilot innovative practices in instructional design for online environments, including digital resources, self-paced learning materials, and integrative projects.
Provide a contribution of expertise to the collective design effort of TecNM Virtual, positioning TSJ en línea as a reference point for good practices in online engineering education.

At the national level, official reports initially projected that the first generation of TecNM Virtual would serve around 300 students. However, enrollment figures exceeded this expectation, with more than 2,800 students joining the three fully online engineering programs. The five courses designed by TSJ en línea were part of this pioneering cohort, thus contributing directly to the expansion of higher education opportunities through digital modalities.

Our participation aimed not only at fulfilling the institutional assignment but also at strengthening the collective vision of TecNM Virtual: providing access, equity, and academic quality in engineering education nationwide. By contributing our knowledge and methodologies, TSJ en línea demonstrated the value of collaborative innovation in scaling digital education and building a sustainable model for future generations of learners.

3. Who was involved in the design process?

The development of TecNM Virtual was a collaborative national endeavor that brought together a wide network of regional and decentralized units of the Tecnológico Nacional de México. According to the official records of the first phase, institutes such as Aguascalientes, San Luis Potosí, Ciudad Victoria, Chihuahua, Cuauhtémoc, Durango, Mérida, Morelia, Querétaro, Tijuana, Tlalnepantla, Toluca, Tuxtla Gutiérrez, and others each assumed responsibility for specific courses in the three online engineering programs. Every participating campus contributed expertise and human resources toward the common purpose of building the system’s first fully online degree programs.

As a decentralized unit, TSJ en línea became part of this pioneering effort, leveraging its previous experience in online instructional design to strengthen the quality and coherence of the courses assigned. Our participation ensured that the work carried out in Jalisco aligned with both the broader educational model of TecNM Virtual and the technical expectations of engineering programs.

Each course design team followed a structure established during the Kick Off stage: four subject matter experts, one instructional designer, and one pedagogical reviewer. This configuration balanced content expertise with instructional and pedagogical rigor, creating a comprehensive design workflow.

In practice, however, responsibilities were not always fixed. Many processes had to be solved in real time, and much of the workflow was shaped by the pedagogical reviewer’s previous experience in private instructional design projects. This adaptive approach allowed the teams to respond flexibly to emerging challenges.

Coordination across multiple experts and designers relied on continuous communication through documentation, group chats, emails, phone calls, and video sessions. These tools created a constant feedback loop, as later confirmed in the forms completed by both teachers and instructional designers.

From this first phase, one lesson stood out above all others: the enormous value of clear and effective communication. Without it, the alignment of multiple roles and the success of a collaborative instructional design process would not have been possible.

4. When did this process take place?

At the Kick Off stage, TecNM Virtual presented an official timeline that outlined the design and implementation of the first five courses. This calendar included specific milestones: the delivery of initial instructional design drafts, expert reviews, the integration of materials into the Moodle platform, and the final assembly before the launch of the semester. The schedule assumed a tight but achievable sequence, reflecting the institutional urgency to demonstrate results in the first phase of TecNM Virtual.

When contrasted with the actual workflow of TSJ en línea, as recorded in the TecNM-Control spreadsheet, important differences emerge. The control de entregas tab reveals that while certain deliverables aligned with the official calendar, others required additional time due to the complexity of content development and the iterative nature of pedagogical review. Similarly, the F4-Montaje tab shows how the assembly of materials in Moodle advanced in waves: some courses reached platform integration on time, while others experienced delays caused by late feedback cycles, technical adjustments to templates, or the refinement of activity instructions.

In practice, responsibilities often overlapped, and deadlines were reinterpreted as working checkpoints rather than immovable dates. The design team adapted by redistributing tasks, extending working hours, and holding frequent virtual meetings—through chats, emails, phone calls, and video sessions—to ensure that progress continued despite the pressures of time. These strategies mitigated risks but also highlighted the limits of an overly rigid schedule when facing the realities of instructional design at scale.

The comparison between the official timeline and the real work calendar offers valuable insights. While the Kick Off schedule provided structure and direction, the lived experience demonstrated that flexibility, communication, and adaptive time management were crucial for achieving the final goal. For future phases of TecNM Virtual, the lesson is clear: planning must balance institutional expectations with the unpredictable dynamics of collaborative design, allowing space for iteration without compromising quality.

5. How was the design process carried out?

The design of the five courses assigned to TSJ en línea followed the official instructional guidelines established by TecNM Virtual. These guidelines were consolidated in the Instructional Guide for the Development of the Teaching Support Guide and its accompanying annexes, which specified how to articulate competencies, activities, resources, and evaluation instruments. However, rather than applying each annex separately, our teams adapted them into a single integrated document—the DI (Instructional Design)—to streamline the workflow and ensure coherence across courses.

The pedagogical flow consistently began with the competencies mandated by each official program of study. These competencies were then translated into learning outcomes and activities, carefully designed to match the required taxonomic level. Each activity was constructed to verify the achievement of competencies, whether through an auto-graded quiz, a guided practice, or a contextualized case study. In this way, learning activities were not isolated exercises, but instruments for developing both conceptual understanding and practical skills aligned with the professional profile of each degree.

Motivational strategies played a deliberate role in shaping engagement. Activity instructions were articulated not only in terms of what students had to do, but also in terms of who they were becoming as future engineers. For instance, assignments explicitly linked the mastery of a method or model with its impact on students’ identity as engineers in business management or computer systems. Short motivational phrases—such as “each challenge is an opportunity to grow” or “excellence is built through consistency”—were embedded throughout the activities, creating a narrative of persistence and professional growth.

The diversity of digital resources was another distinctive element. According to the catalog of Digital Educational Resources, each course integrated interactive books, quizzes, simulations, videos, and in some cases educational games. These resources were not used randomly; they were sequenced to scaffold learning, provide immediate feedback, and allow multiple entry points into the content. This design decision supported inclusivity and learner autonomy, reducing barriers for students with different rhythms and learning preferences.

Finally, one of the most significant contributions of the TSJ en línea team was the balance between rigor and flexibility. While the official templates demanded precise structures—rubrics, checklists, learning plans—the day-to-day reality required adjustments. Drawing from prior private-sector experience in instructional design, the pedagogical reviewer reconfigured workflows when necessary, ensuring deadlines were met without sacrificing coherence. This adaptive approach demonstrated that fidelity to institutional models can coexist with responsive, context-driven solutions.

In sum, the design process combined institutional guidelines, pedagogical intentionality, and adaptive creativity. It reflected a hybrid identity: on one hand, rigorous compliance with TecNM Virtual’s official framework; on the other, the innovative and humanizing touch of local instructional design practices. This combination ensured that the final products were not only technically consistent, but also pedagogically meaningful for students navigating their first experience in fully online engineering programs.

6. Where did this process take place? (Infrastructure and resources)

The design and implementation of the five courses assigned to TSJ en línea took place within the technological and pedagogical ecosystem of TecNM Virtual. At the institutional level, the official Learning Management System (LMS) was Moodle (version 2.8), configured with a minimum bandwidth requirement of 1 MB symmetric for stable access. This platform served as the backbone for organizing course content, hosting digital resources, and enabling communication between teachers and students.

Each course required specific programs and simulators according to its disciplinary field. Operations Research (both in Business Management and Computer Systems Engineering) relied heavily on tools such as spreadsheets and optimization software for modeling and decision-making. Numerical Methods incorporated computational environments like Octave, Python, or R, essential for applying algorithms and validating results. Principles of Electricity and Digital Applications integrated circuit simulation software, while General Physics drew on digital labs and virtual simulations to visualize and analyze physical phenomena. These tools were not ancillary, but integral to ensuring that students could bridge theoretical learning with professional practice.

The courses also made extensive use of Digital Educational Resources (DERs) defined in the official catalog (Anexo 7). Interactive books, quizzes, videos, presentations, and educational games created with H5P were incorporated to reinforce key concepts and provide immediate feedback. Complementary resources—such as presentations, study booklets, and expert-designed readings—were integrated to diversify learning pathways and support accessibility. The Activity Guides (Anexos 3 and 4), along with rubrics and checklists (Anexos 8 and 9), structured the evaluation of student performance and ensured consistency across the virtual classrooms.

Despite this infrastructure, several challenges emerged. Connectivity limitations in certain regions affected access to synchronous activities. Moodle’s restrictions made it difficult to implement more adaptive assessments, and the need to reformat self-authored materials into H5P occasionally delayed integration. To address these issues, the teams prioritized lightweight resources (PDFs, presentations, auto-graded quizzes) to guarantee accessibility, and relied on forums, internal messaging, and optional video sessions as flexible channels of communication.

The result was an ecosystem where infrastructure and pedagogy intertwined. Resources were not simply uploaded but deliberately sequenced: diagnostic quizzes to identify prior knowledge, formative activities with instant feedback, and summative projects linked to professional contexts. This careful orchestration ensured that each tool and platform feature contributed directly to the competency-based learning model of TecNM Virtual, strengthening inclusivity, engagement, and the professional identity of students navigating engineering programs fully online.

7. What difficulties emerged during the process?

The design process unfolded under a waterfall methodology, where each step depended heavily on the timely completion of the previous one. This structure created a chain effect: when one deliverable was delayed, the entire sequence of tasks shifted forward. According to the progress reports, resources authored by subject matter experts were consistently delayed by three to five days, depending on the team and the topic. This meant that milestones planned for Monday were often only delivered by Thursday or Friday. The cumulative effect of these delays directly impacted the instructional designers, who reported that they could not advance with synchronous activities or the assembly of units in Moodle without the experts’ materials.

Another challenge was the need to create working-templates from scratch. Although these templates were essential for standardizing design, most teachers were unfamiliar with their purpose. This required additional communication and iterative clarification, not only in the design process itself but also in graphic design and platform assembly. For future projects, it would be advisable to adapt templates and provide visual examples that demonstrate how each section works in practice.

The integration of multiple annexes into a single Instructional Design document (DI) also revealed an important lesson. While each annex was checked against the DI to ensure compliance with TecNM requirements, the team found that having fewer documents consolidated into one reduced cognitive load and allowed for greater coherence in tone, argumentation, and pedagogical flow.

Although formal roles were defined in the Kick Off presentation, in practice the figure of the “lead expert” struggled to direct tasks. Designers often bypassed formal hierarchies, resolving issues as they arose. This highlighted an area for improvement in role clarity and delegation, as well as the need for direct channels of communication with the designated leader.

At the start of the process, there was also a lack of clear communication protocols. No unified tracking document existed for teachers to monitor their own progress, which made it harder to hold teams accountable for punctual submissions. This absence reinforced the importance of establishing shared tools for monitoring advances.

From a curricular standpoint, the programs were generally complete, but several issues emerged. Competencies were sometimes vaguely defined, suggested activities did not always align with the content, and bibliographic references were uneven. Experts also expressed concerns about overloaded programs, where certain topics attempted to cover content equivalent to an entire semester. In response, the instructional design teams sought to create activities that guided students step by step through scaffolded learning experiences, often using trigger questions or structured situations to facilitate understanding without oversimplifying or “giving away the grade.”

Rework became another recurrent issue. In several cases, the content provided by experts either reproduced textbook passages directly or incorporated text generated by artificial intelligence without adaptation. This required sensitive handling: designers had to adapt materials to ensure originality, consistency with TecNM standards, and appropriateness for student learning.

Finally, there was a subtle but significant resistance from experts to pedagogical shifts. Many were accustomed to acting as facilitators of knowledge, rather than guides in competency-based learning experiences. This cultural adjustment—moving from lecture-based teaching to the design of activities that foster autonomy and critical engagement—proved difficult for some. Surveys completed by instructional designers confirmed that this tension was one of the most common challenges during the project.

To safeguard quality, the final review of products followed a checklist developed by the pedagogical reviewer. Each designer submitted their materials for verification, and when critical doubts arose, they were resolved jointly with the reviewer. This layered approach ensured that despite the difficulties, the final resources reached students in their best pedagogical version, aligned with the TecNM Virtual model.

8. What did we learn from this experience?

Pedagogical decisions that supported student learning

Among the five courses designed in this first phase, General Physics and Principles of Electricity and Digital Applications offered some of the most significant pedagogical challenges. Both are conceptually demanding: the first due to its mathematical complexity and practical orientation, the second due to its laboratory-based nature. Designing them for a fully online environment required deliberate instructional decisions to ensure that students could engage with content meaningfully, despite the absence of physical labs.

The design strategy began by prioritizing auto-graded theoretical activities to introduce each topic. These activities provided students with immediate feedback, enabling them to identify weaknesses and strengthen theoretical understanding before advancing to more complex practices. Once students had consolidated the basics, the design moved to higher taxonomic levels through structured practices. Here, subject matter experts guided decisions by asking whether a given concept could be addressed with auto-graded feedback or whether it required a more elaborate activity with step-by-step problem-solving.

For activities demanding multi-step processes—such as virtual experiments or structured problem sets—the team created work templates with precise instructions. These templates ensured that students could follow a clear pathway to apply theoretical knowledge in practice. To prevent overload, a time-calculation formula was applied, combining estimated reading time, video consumption, note-taking, activity completion, and platform interaction. If the total exceeded the assigned duration, the complexity was adjusted.

Equally important was the clarity of instructions. Activities were broken into concise steps, written in accessible language and repeated across the template and the LMS. This not only reduced confusion but also facilitated evaluation, since both students and teachers were provided with the same rubric. Students used it to self-check their work, while teachers used it as a precise tool for assessment. In addition, solved examples were included in the teacher’s guide, ensuring that even instructors with less experience in online facilitation could grade consistently.

To foster engagement, the team introduced trigger questions and professional identity narratives. For example, each unit began with a scenario linked to students’ future professional roles: how an engineer might apply a given law of physics or use digital systems in a real workplace. These questions acted as entry points, motivating students by connecting abstract knowledge with practical and professional relevance.

Although these strategies emerged from accumulated experience in TSJ en línea and have not yet been fully tested in TecNM Virtual, they represent an intentional innovation. For students, the approach is expected to lower the threshold of difficulty and build confidence in complex subjects. For teachers, the structured alignment of activities with taxonomies, didactic strategies, and explicit rubrics marked a significant shift in how courses were constructed. Future surveys of teachers and students will help confirm the effectiveness of these decisions, but early reflections suggest they may serve as a replicable model for future phases.

Effective teamwork and communication

Despite delays and setbacks, some teamwork practices proved highly effective. Constant communication channels—including shared documents, chats, emails, and video calls—created a feedback loop that allowed designers and experts to solve problems quickly. Checklists and shared spreadsheets, even when introduced late in the process, became invaluable tools for monitoring progress and clarifying expectations. The lesson learned is that systematic communication protocols should be defined from the beginning of any future project.

Instructional innovations with potential for replication

Several innovations showed strong potential for replication in future courses:

The use of H5P interactive resources (books, quizzes, videos, games) to provide immediate feedback.
The creation of integrative projects that connected multiple topics into applied learning outcomes.
The incorporation of narrative and motivational elements that framed learning as part of students’ professional identity.
The consolidation of annexes into a single DI document, which reduced cognitive load for designers and improved coherence.

Balancing rigor and flexibility

One of the most important lessons was the need to balance institutional rigor with practical flexibility. On the one hand, the TecNM Virtual model provided necessary structure through annexes, templates, and rubrics. On the other hand, strict adherence to multiple separate documents proved inefficient. By consolidating all elements into a single DI, the team maintained compliance while improving workflow efficiency. This balance demonstrates that fidelity to institutional standards does not preclude pragmatic adjustments.

Safeguarding quality through structured review

Quality was ensured through the use of checklists, rubrics, and structured review processes. Designers cross-checked their products with the pedagogical reviewer, who verified compliance with both the institutional model and pedagogical coherence. This systematic review process minimized inconsistencies and improved the final quality of the courses.

Lessons for future phases

The experience revealed that retrabajo and delays can be reduced by:

Providing visual examples of templates before design begins, so that teachers understand the purpose of each section.
Creating a shared tracking document to monitor progress and increase accountability.
Establishing clear communication protocols at the outset, specifying which channels to use for feedback, revisions, and emergencies.
Reinforcing guidelines on academic integrity to prevent overreliance on textbook copying or AI-generated text without adaptation.

In short, the first phase of TecNM Virtual showed that while the project faced real challenges, it also generated a robust set of lessons and best practices. These insights can—and should—be systematically integrated into the methodology for future phases, ensuring that the next iteration benefits from both the achievements and the difficulties of this pioneering stage.

9. For what purpose? (Impact and projection)

The five courses designed by TSJ en línea contributed directly to the institutional goals of TecNM Virtual. As part of the first national phase, they represented a concrete response to the mandate of expanding access to higher education and launching the three fully online engineering programs. By ensuring that foundational third- and fourth-semester courses were ready for integration, the project not only provided essential academic content but also symbolized the collaborative spirit of TecNM, where decentralized units joined forces to create a unified virtual model.

From an institutional perspective, the project also positioned TSJ en línea as an active contributor within TecNM Virtual. By designing five courses, coordinating interdisciplinary teams, and applying prior expertise in online instructional design, our unit strengthened its reputation as a reliable partner in large-scale virtual education initiatives. The decision to consolidate annexes into a single Instructional Design document (DI), the use of standardized templates, and the consistent application of rubrics and trigger questions all became practices that may serve as reference models for subsequent phases.

At this stage, it is not yet possible to measure the direct impact on students, since the courses belong to the third and fourth semesters. The first cohort of TecNM Virtual students will only reach them after completing their first academic year. For now, the impact can only be projected: activities designed to balance auto-graded resources with structured practices, the integration of motivational narratives, and clear alignment with professional identities are expected to support learning autonomy, engagement, and academic progression once these courses are taught.

For future rounds of course design, several recommendations emerge from this experience:

Provide visual examples of templates before starting the design process, so teachers clearly understand their purpose.
Establish communication protocols and shared tracking tools at the outset, increasing accountability and reducing delays.
Integrate academic integrity guidelines into the onboarding process for experts, preventing overreliance on textbooks or unadapted AI-generated text.
Continue balancing institutional rigor with flexibility, maintaining compliance while allowing pragmatic adaptations that improve workflow.

Beyond the immediate contributions, this experience also opens a broader horizon for online engineering education in Mexico. By validating the TecNM Virtual methodology while enriching it with our own practices, we are now faced with new questions: What comes next? How can we refine this model? How does online engineering education evolve in other institutions nationally and internationally? This project has widened our perspective, allowing us to compare, question, and imagine new possibilities. Most importantly, it has renewed our energy and commitment to contribute actively to the ongoing improvement of online higher education.

Conclusions

The first phase of TecNM Virtual marked a decisive step toward building a national model of online engineering education. The five courses designed by TSJ en línea not only contributed to the institutional goal of expanding access but also demonstrated the capacity of collaborative teams to adapt official guidelines into pedagogically coherent and technologically viable learning experiences.

This postmortem reveals both achievements and challenges. On the one hand, the team successfully consolidated multiple annexes into a single Instructional Design document, integrated innovative resources such as H5P, and embedded motivational narratives that linked learning to students’ professional identity. On the other hand, delays, retrabajo, and gaps in communication underscored the need for clearer processes, better-aligned tools, and stronger protocols from the outset.

Looking ahead, the value of this first experience lies not only in what was accomplished but in the lessons that can be systematically transformed into practices for the second round of design. To ensure that these lessons translate into measurable improvements in student learning outcomes, the following actions are proposed:

Refine the work templates in collaboration with subject matter experts, ensuring clarity of purpose and providing visual examples for each element.
Enhance the DI document so that it fully integrates all the information required by the TecNM Virtual platform, reducing the need for duplications or adjustments during assembly.
Improve the control documents, eliminating elements that were not useful and reorganizing those that proved effective, in order to streamline tracking and accountability.
Establish communication protocols at the beginning of the project, specifying preferred channels for feedback, deadlines, and troubleshooting.
Introduce shared progress trackers accessible to both experts and designers, making progress visible and encouraging timely submissions.
Integrate training on academic integrity into the onboarding process for experts, preventing overreliance on textbooks or unadapted AI-generated text.
Balance rigor and flexibility, maintaining fidelity to institutional requirements while allowing adaptations that reduce cognitive load and promote pedagogical coherence.

By addressing these points, the second round of course design will not only replicate the successes of the first but also mitigate its challenges, moving closer to the vision of TecNM Virtual: a scalable, inclusive, and high-quality model of online engineering education for Mexico.

This entrance was a very long one. Nevertheless, I trully appreciate the time you take reading it.

See you later!