Based on the material and the client's learning objectives, I determined that an interactive course (containing a survey of the SAT as well as a placement quiz) would be the best medium to achieve these outcomes.
Note: I had several ideas about what sort of course this would be (e.g. website, slide deck, survey tool, utilizing gamification, etc), but I outlined the main elements that would be used regardless of the specifics of the tool.
INITIAL LOGO DEVELOPMENT
The center logo (without words) is a vector drawn creation that led to the main logo design (top & bottom) that I used for this course.
The flashlight element is inspired by the learning outcomes of revealing, learning, and illuminating the "daunting" elements of the SAT. The #2 pencil is a fixed staple of the SAT, and ties the flashlight into the theme of the project.
Note: often this level of design is delegated to the "development" phase of instructional design, but for my own process, I find implementing small design elements as soon as possible to be essential for brainstorming and driving inspiration and creative flow.
The first step was to synthesize the client's main learning objectives.
Note: This step is important, because the initial "instructional design" ask often does not directly address the real learning needs. Stating these learning objectives clearly helps to treat the root need rather than a peripheral symptom.
For Gear Up, the learning objectives were more about SAT participation than about a specific SAT score bracket. This adjusted the medium in my estimation. With a participation objective, an essential design element will focus on familiarity rather than mastery.
At one partner school, there is a 6-class program in place to help students prepare for the SAT. We deemed this format to be an appropriate pilot for this tool. So in this design phase, I outlined a simple base curriculum that the tool could be implemented into seamlessly and effectively.
Note: According to the client, this course has typically had little preparation time and few resources. This meant that the curriculum needed to be especially light-weight for the instructor leading it, and able to be applied by instructors with various capacities in the SAT subjects (e.g. math teacher vs language vs substitute).