Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rapid prototyping methodology in action: A developmental study

  • Development
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigated the use of rapid prototyping methodologies in two projects conducted in a natural work setting. It sought to determine the nature of its use by designers and customers and the extent to which its use enhances traditional instructional design (ID). With respect to describing rapid prototyping use, the results pertain to designer tasks performed, the concurrent processing of those tasks, and customer involvement. With respect to describing the enhancements facilitated by rapid prototyping, the results pertain to design and development cycle-time reduction, product quality, and customer and designer satisfaction. In general, the two projects studied show ID efforts that created products that were usable for a conveniently long period of time without revision; delivered in a shorter period of time than would have been expected using traditional techniques; and received by satisfied customers who had been involved throughout their development. In other words, the rapid prototyping methods lived up to their promised benefits.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Appleman, R.L., Pugh, R.C., & Slantz, J.E. (1995, October).Increasing the efficacy of informal video through rapid prototyping. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-Western Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

  • Arthur, L.J. (1992). Quick & dirty.Computerworld, 26(50), 109–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, R., Mobley, K., & Turk, K. (1994). Preparing to document an object-oriented project.Technical Communication, 41(4), 643–652.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, J.K., & Aversa, F.N. (1979). Formative evaluation information from scripts, scratch tracks, and rough cuts: A comparison.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 27, 191–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr-Chellman, A.; Cuyar, C., & Breman, J. (1998). User-design: A case application in health care training.Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(4), 97–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collis, B.A., & de Boer, W.F. (1998) Rapid Prototyping as a faculty-wide activity: An innovative approach to the redesign of courses and instructional methods at the University of Twente.Educational Media International 35(2), 117–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corry, M.D., Frick, T.W., & Hansen, L. (1997) User-Centered Design and Usability Testing of a Web Site: An Illustrative Case Study.Educational Technology Research and Development 45(4), 65–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodrum, D.A., Dorsey, L.T., & Schwen, T.M. (1993). Defining and building an enriched learning and information environment.Educational Technology, 33(11), 10–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graells, P.M.I. (1993). Designing educational software for pupils in the 12–16 age group: What to produce and how?Educational Media International, 30(3), 138–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, D.E., & Black, T.R. (1994). Prototyping of computer-based training materials.Computers Education, 22(3), 251–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson, K.L., & Branch, R.M. (1997). Revisioning Models of Instructional Development.Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(3), 73–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haugen, E.J., & Nedwek, B.P., (1988). Using prototyping and simulation as decision tools in a purchased-software implementation.Cause/Effect, 11(5), 11–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hix, D., & Hartson, H.R. (1993).Developing user interfaces: Ensuring usability through product & process. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M.K., Li, Z., & Merrill, M.D. (1992). Rapid prototyping in automating instructional design.Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(4), 95–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lange, S.R., & Shanahan, C.M. (1996). Designing instructor-led schools with rapid prototyping.Performance Improvement, 35(8), 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law, M.P., Okey, J.R., & Carter, B.J. (1995). Developing electronic performance support systems for professions. In M.R. Simonson & M. Anderson (Eds.)17th Annual Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the 1995 National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 309–315). Ames, IA: Iowa State University. ED # 383284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luqi, V. (1989).Software evolution through rapid prototyping. Computer.

  • Moonen, J. (1996). Prototyping as a design method. In T. Plomp & D.P. Ely (Eds.),International encyclopedia of educational technology (pp. 186–190). New York: Elsevier Science Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muraida, D.J., & Spector, J.M. (1993). The advanced instructional design advisor.Instructional Science, 21(4), 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rathbun, G.A., Saito, R.S., & Goodrum, D.A. (1997). Reconceiving ISD: Three perspectives on rapid prototyping as a paradigm shift. In O. Abel, N.J. Maushak & K.E. Wright (Eds.),19th Annual Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the 1997 National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 291–296). Ames, IA: Iowa State University. ED # 409832.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richey, R.C. (1997) Research on instructional development.Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(3), 91–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richey, R.C., & Nelson, W. (1996). Developmental research. In D. Jonassen (Ed.),Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 1213–1245). New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reilly, J.P. (1996).Rapid prototyping: Moving to business-centric development.Boston, MA:International Thompson Computer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tessmer, M. (1994). Formative evaluation alternatives.Performance Improvement Quarterly, 7(1), 3–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tripp, S., & Bichelmeyer, B. (1990). Rapid prototyping: An alternative instructional design strategy.Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1), 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C., Moore, D.M., & Burton, J.K. (1995). Managing courseware production: an instructional design model with a software engineering approach.Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(4), 60–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zemke, R. (1997). How long does it take?Training, 34(5), 69, 70, 72, 74, 77, 79.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the Teacher Education Department at Eastern Michigan University, USA

    Toni Stokes Jones (Assistant Professor)

  2. Wayne State University, Detroit, MI.

    Rita C. Richey (professor and program coordinator of Instructional Technology)

Authors
  1. Toni Stokes Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rita C. Richey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The authors would like to thank those who have contributed to this manuscript: Tim Spannaus and Collette Pariseau who permitted this research to happen in the first place; the anonymous reviewers for their helpful insights and suggestions; and Gary Morrison for his additional manuscript critiques.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jones, T.S., Richey, R.C. Rapid prototyping methodology in action: A developmental study. ETR&D 48, 63–80 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02313401

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02313401

Keywords

Search

Navigation