Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Designing Instruction For Open Sharing pp 271–329Cite as

Early Designs, Prototypes, and Learning Sequences for Exploration and Decision Making

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 348 Accesses

Abstract

During the early development phase, designers-developers may process the collected raw data and begin organizing the collected imagery; they may draft various learning objects, with full functionalities, in order to see how the objects look and how well the instantiated item compares with the original plan. They may experiment with item contents, sequencing, functions, style, and other features. This phase may be fleeting for some, but when observed with care, these processes may be informative to the ultimate project and beneficial to the learning. This chapter describes some ways to benefit from early designs and prototypes, to inform individuals of ways forward. After all, designs and plans look appropriate and clean and doable until they are tested in the real, and there are numerous discoveries to be made once the development work actually starts.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agustin M, Chuang G, Delgado A, Ortega A, Seaver J, and Buchanan JW. Game sketching. In the proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts (DIMEA ’07). Perth, Australia. Sept. 19 – 21, 2007. 36 – 43, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1145/1306813.1306829.

  • Alavi M. An assessment of the prototyping approach to information systems development. Computing Practices 27: 556 - 563, 1984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardzell J, Bardzell S, Briggs C, Makice K, Ryan W, and Weldon M. Machinima prototyping: An approach to evaluation. In NordiCHI 2006. Oslo, Norway. Oct. 14 – 18, 2006. 433 – 436, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaudouin-Lafon M, and Mackay W. Prototyping tools and techniques. In The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook. Ch. 52. 1006 - 1031, 2002. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=772136/.

  • Berghel H. New wave prototyping: Use and abuse of vacuous prototypes. Interactions: 49 – 54, 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bødker S, and Grønbæk K. Cooperative prototyping – Users and designers in mutual activity. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies. 1 – 23, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulet G. Rapid prototyping: An efficient way to collaboratively design and develop e-learning content. Navy e-learning center of excellence. 1 – 6, 2009. http://faculty.mercer.edu/codone_s/tco620/2013/Rapid_prototyping.pdf.

  • Buchenau M, and Suri J.F. Experience prototyping. DIS ’00. Brooklyn, New York. 424 – 433, 2000. https://hci.stanford.edu/dschool/resources/prototyping/SuriExperiencePrototyping.pdf.

  • Christensen TK, and Osguthorpe RT. How do instructional-design practitioners make instructional-strategy decisions? Performance Improvement Quarterly 17: 45 – 65, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark RC, and Mayer RE. E-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning. 4th Ed. Wiley. 1 – 528, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daugherty J, Teng Y-T, and Cornachione E. Rapid prototyping instructional design: Revisiting the ISD model. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED504673.pdf. 1 – 8, 2007.

  • Desrosier J. Rapid Prototyping Reconsidered. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education 59: 135-145, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2011.614881.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devedžić V, Jovanović J, and Gašević D. The pragmatics of current e-learning standards. IEEE Internet Computing. 16 – 24, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas I. Instructional design based on reusable learning objects: Applying lessons of object-oriented software engineering to learning systems design. In the proceedings of the 31st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Oct. 10 – 13, 2001. Reno, Nevada. F4E-1 – F4E-5, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas I. Issues in software engineering of relevance to instructional design. TechTrends 50 28 – 35, 2006. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ774616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dow SP, Glassco A, Kass J, Schwarz M, Schwartz DL, and Klemmer SR. Parallel prototyping leads to better design results, more divergence, and increased self-efficacy. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact 17: 4, 1 – 24, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1145/1879831.1879836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelson DC. Design research: What we learn when we engage in design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 11: 105 – 121, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehlers U-D. Extending the territory: From open educational resources to open educational practices. Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning: 15, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gayeski DM. Out-of-the-box instructional design. Training & Development 52: 36+, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson KL, and Branch RM. Revisioning models of instructional development. Educational Technology Research & Development (ETR&D) 45: 73- 89, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding D, and Ingraham B. The art of design. Ch. 11. In H. Beetham and R. Sharpe’s Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Designing and Delivering E-Learning. Routledge. 142 – 152, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey B. 49. Learning Objects and Instructional Design. Technical evaluation reports. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 6: 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holder D. Instructional design strategy for achieving alignment: Which comes first, activities or assessments? E-Learning Industry.com. https://elearningindustry.com/instructional-design-strategy-for-achieving-alignment. 2013.

  • Hounde S, and Hill C. What do prototypes prototype? In M. Helander, T. Landauer, P Prabhu (eds.): Elsevier Science. Amsterdam. 1 – 16, 1997. Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (2nd ed.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones MK, Li Z, and Merrill MD. Rapid prototyping in automated instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development (ETR&D) 40: 95 – 100, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones TS, and Richey, RC. Rapid prototyping methodology in action: A developmental study. Educational Technology Research and Development (ETR&D) 48: 63 – 80, 2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joseph PB, Bravmann SL, Windschitl MA, Mikel ER, and Green NS. Cultures of Curriculum. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kabisch E, and Williams A. Vice interfaces. In the proceedings of TEI 2012. Kingston, Ontario, Canada. Feb. 19 – 22, 2012. 343 – 346., 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • Leacock TL, and Nesbit JC. A framework for evaluating the quality of multimedia learning resources. Educational Technology & Society 10: 44 – 59, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • “Learning object”. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_object. Dec. 19, 2017.

  • Lim Y-K, Stolterman E, and Tenenberg J. The anatomy of prototypes: Prototypes as filters, prototypes as manifestations of design ideas. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 15: 7:1-7:27, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1145/1375761.1375762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lohr LL. Designing the instructional interface. Computers in Human Behavior 16: 161 – 182, 2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malopinsky L, Kirkley J, Stein R, and Duffy T. An instructional design model for online problem based learning (PBL) environments: The Learning to Teach with Technology Studio. In Annual Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Papers Presented at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology: 1-2. Denver, CO. Oct. 25 – 28, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald JK. The creative spirit of design. TechTrends 55: 53 – 57, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLoughlin C. Inclusivity and alignment: Principles of pedagogy, task and assessment design for effective cross-cultural online learning. Distance Education 22: 7 – 29, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791010220102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moustakis C. Heuristic Research: Design, Methodology, and Applications. Newbury Park, California: SAGE Publications. 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petre M. Mental imagery and software visualization in high-performance software development teams. Jrn of Visual Languages and Computing 21: 171 – 183, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrelli D, Dulake N, Marshall M, Willox M, Caparrelli F, and Goldberg R. Prototyping tangibles: Exploring form and interaction. In 8th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction (TEI’14). Feb. 16 – 19, 2014. Munch, Germany. 41 – 48, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pniewska J, Adrian WT, and Czerwoniec A. Prototyping – Is it a more creative way for shaping ideas. In MIDI ’13. June 24 – 25, 2013. Warsaw, Poland. 1 – 8, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramesh A, Goldwasser D, Huang B, Daumé III H, and Getoor L. Uncovering hidden engagement patterns for predicting learner performance in MOOCs. Atlanta, Georgia. Mar. 4 – 5, 2014. In L@S 2014. 157 – 158, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawsthorne P. Agile methods of software engineering should continue to have an influence over instructional design methodologies. Cape Breton University & Memorial University of Newfoundland. Research paper. 1 – 14, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves TC. Enhancing the worth of instructional technology research through ‘design experiments’ and other development research strategies. In International Perspectives on Instructional Technology Research for the 21st Century. SIG/Instructional Technology at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, Louisiana. 1 – 15, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves TC, Herrington J, and Oliver R. Design research: A socially responsible approach to instructional technology research in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 16: 96 – 115, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richey RC and Klein JD. Developmental research methods: Creating knowledge from instructional design and development practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 16: 23 – 38, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rico J, and Brewster S. Gesture and voice prototyping for early evaluations of social acceptability in multimodal interfaces. In the proceedings of ICMI-MLMI’10. Nov. 8 – 10, 2010. Beijing, China. 1 – 8, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez CO. MOOCs and the AI-Stanford like courses: Two successful and distinct course formats for Massive Open Online Courses. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. 1 – 13, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowland G. What do instructional designers actually do? An initial investigation of expert practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly 5: 65 – 86, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.1992.tb00546.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland G, and DiVasto T. Instructional design and powerful learning. Performance Improvement Quarterly 26: 9 – 42, 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roytek MA. Enhancing instructional design efficiency: Methodologies employed by instructional designers. British Journal of Educational Technology 41: 170 – 180, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00902.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sefelin R, Tscheligi M, and Giller V. Paper prototyping – What is it good for? A comparison of paper- and computer-based low-fidelity prototyping. In CHI 2003 New Horizons. Apr. 5 – 10, 2003. Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. 778 – 779, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims R, and Jones D. Continuous improvement through shared understanding: Reconceptulaizing instructional design for online learning. In Winds of change in the sea of learning: Proceedings of the 19 th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education. Auckland, New Zealand. Dec. 8 – 11, 2002. UNITEC Institute of Technology. ASCILITE. http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/auckland02/proceedings/papers/162.pdf. 1 – 10, 2002.

  • Snyder C. Paper prototyping. IBM DeveloperWorks. https://www.csee.umbc.edu/courses/undergraduate/345/spring12/mitchell/readings/paperPrototyping_Snyder.pdf. 2001.

  • Soto VJ. Which instructional design models are educators using to design virtual world instruction? MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 9: 1 – 11, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Surry DW, and Farquhar JD. Incorporating social factors into instructional design theory. In M. Bailey, & M. Jones, (Eds.) Work, Education, and Technology: 6.1-6.8, 1996. DeKalb, IL: LEPS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swirski T. Unleashing the imagination in learning, teaching and assessment: Design perspectives, innovative practices and meaning making. ATN Assessment Conference. Australia. Retrieved from https://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/Swirski.pdf. 2010.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuch AN, Roth SP, Hornbӕk K, Opwis K, and Bargas-Avila JA. Is beautiful really usable? Toward understanding the relation between usability, aesthetics, and affect in HCI. Computers in Human Behavior 28: 1596 – 1607, 2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaidyanathan J, Robbins JE, and Redmiles DF. Using HTML to create early prototypes. In CHI 99. May 15 – 20, 1999. 232 – 233, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Rooij SW. Project management in instructional design: ADDIE is not enough. British Journal of Educational Technology 41: 852 – 864, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visscher-Voerman I, and Gustafson KL. Paradigms in the theory and practice of education and training design. Educational Technology Research & Design (ETR&D) 52: 69 – 89, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson B, Jonassen D, and Cole P. Cognitive approaches to instructional design. In G.M. Piskurich (Ed.), The ASTD Handbook of Instructional Technology. New York: McGraw Hill. 21.1 - 21.22, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yanchar SC, and Gabbitas BW. Between eclecticism and orthodoxy in instructional design. Education Tech Research Dev 59: 383 – 398, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeung L, Plimmer B, Lobb B, and Elliffe D. Levels of formality in diagram presentation. In the proceedings of OzCHI 2007 Proceedings. Nov. 28 – 30, 2007. Adelaide, Australia. 311 – 317, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

Additional Reading Section

  • Budhai SS, and Skipwith KB. Best Practices in Engaging Online Learners through Active and Experiential Learning Strategies. New York: Routledge. 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark RC, and Mayer RE. E-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning. 4th Ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dirksen J. Design for How People Learn. 2nd Ed. London: New Riders, Peachpit Press, Pearson Education. 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moustakis C. Heuristic Research: Design, Methodology, and Applications. Newbury Park, California: SAGE Publications. 1990.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Information Technology Services (ITS), Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA

    Shalin Hai-Jew

Authors
  1. Shalin Hai-Jew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Key Terms and Definitions

#failfast

A silicon valley value to test new ideas quickly and identify quickly whether they will or will not work in order to advance to more constructive approaches

Curation

Management of a set or collection of object types

Draft

A preliminary version

Early designs

Any of an initial series of instantiated or expressed concepts for a particular (instructional) plan

Evolutionary prototype

An early design that evolves as understandings (of user needs, of technological contexts, and other information) change

Exemplars

An excellent or typical example

Learning object

A reusable component-based resource used for learning in different contexts

Paper prototyping

Using paper and pencil/pens for early designs comprised of drawings and text usually

Prototype

The first of a type or form, a model, an archetype

Throwaway prototype

An initial design created for learning and not for implementation, available for discarding

Wireframe

A digital prototype (of a website, application, or software program) that enables some observable behaviors/functionality and structures that mimic a real object

WYSIWYG

“What You See is What You Get” as a kind of technological design interface for authoring

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hai-Jew, S. (2019). Early Designs, Prototypes, and Learning Sequences for Exploration and Decision Making. In: Designing Instruction For Open Sharing. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02713-1_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02713-1_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-02712-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-02713-1

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation