Rapid Prototyping in Instructional Design

The idea, meaning, and use of rapid prototyping differ across disciplines. This article discusses rapid prototyping in the field of instructional design.

Rapid Prototyping

Usually, instructional designing relies on following the linear ADDIE (analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation) model to develop an instruction or content. Rapid prototyping (RP) is an alternate, iterative design methodology to such a traditional, linear instructional design model. As the name suggests, it involves creating a prototype (working model of the final product); and just like any other prototype, it has the key features that get duplicated in the final (instructional) product.

RP is a way of designing content that involves creating a prototype, evaluating the prototype by seeking feedback from the stakeholders (learner, client, and the SME), implementing the feedback into the prototype, repeating this process of user evaluation and feedback implementation till the prototype evolves into an approved content by the stakeholders. This iterative design-evaluation cycle continues through the life of the project. Because of the repetitive, iterative process that RP follows, it is also called a spiral cycle or layered approach of instructional designing.

RP ensures developing effective instruction, especially in large projects, because of the stakeholder (student, client, and SME) involvement early at the design phase. Mistakes in the design are easier to fix at this stage than when the project is completely developed—it saves time, effort, and money to catch and fix the issues early.

Comparison

Traditional Instructional Design Model:

Step 1: Define concept (objectives, expectations, and audience) for the learning; Step 2: Define requirements of the learning; Step 3: Create a preliminary design; Step 4: Create the detailed design; Step 5: Develop the complete learning; Step 6: Implement or program the learning; Step 7: Test the learning for acceptance; Step 8: Correct the loopholes that got left out from Step 2.

In other words, the classic ADDIE model looks like:

Analysis -> Design -> Development -> Implementation -> Evaluation

[ADDIE follows a structured, linear, step-by-step, progressive approach through each of these five stages to come up with a particular content delivery or edition.]

RP Model:

Step 1: Define concept (objectives, expectations, and audience) for the learning; Step 2: Create a prototype; Step 3: Perform user evaluation and concept refinement; Step 4: Implement refined requirements; Step 5: Repeat Steps 3 and 4 in a continuous cycle.

In other words, the RP model looks like:

Information gathering -> Design Phase (iterative process: Design -> Prototype -> Review) -> Development Phase (iterative process: Develop -> Implement -> Evaluate)

[In a way, the design and development phases happen concurrently than sequentially in RP as compared to the traditional instructional design models. This makes the project cycle of RP shorter.]

Usage

You, as an instructional designer, can opt to use RP when you are struggling with time and budget for a learning project. Because of the stakeholder (learner, client, and SME) intervention at an earlier stage, mistakes are identified early; and therefore, the chances of rework at a later stage greatly reduce. The opposite often happens while following the linear, traditional models—the finished product often presents errors that need to be fixed—because these errors were not identified at an early stage, they replicate themselves all through the project subsections; and therefore, fixing them consumes a lot of time. In addition, in RP, the design and the development happen concurrently rather than sequentially. This translates to lesser time spent on the project, which also means you can complete the project on a tighter budget.

You can also use RP when you have two competing approaches of designing an instruction and you would like to get an idea about which approach would appeal and befit more to the learner.

Advantages

Getting feedback from the learners at an early stage: RP involves the learners early at the design phase. It is better to involve the learners to get their feedback than to believe that you can put yourself in learners’ shoes as much (and as well) as the learners themselves can. I believe that the self-critique of your work or instruction can never match to the feedback that you get from the learners. When you get the content evaluated by the learners and then implement their feedback, it improves your chances of delivering a more fit content for the learner. It makes you realize, at an earlier stage (design stage rather than the development stage), the mistakes or inefficiencies that might seep into the project. All this, saves time and increases effectiveness of an instruction.

Fine tuning yourself with changing client needs: Your client might have the most specific requirements and expectations when it first approaches you for developing content for a given audience. However, most often than not, client requirements and expectations change or evolve during the content development process. RP gives you an opportunity to assess whether the approach that you are following to design your content is in tandem with client’s requirements—fixed as well as changing requirements. (Every now and then, some client requirements or expectations are implicit. Because they are implicit, this information is only held by the client. When the client sees how the prototype is evolving, chances are that those requirements or expectations become explicit—for you as well as for the client.) A prototype that satisfies the client requirements is likely to result in a satisfactory finished (instructional) product. Get the client’s buy in and save expectation failures and later disappointments.

Accelerating the development process: Because RP seeks and incorporates the suggestions by the stakeholders (learner, client, and SME) early at the design phase, the development process gets quicker than it would have been if there were uncertainties about the stakeholders’ reactions to the design of the content. If content is developed with such uncertainties, the rework on the design and the developed content can be quite time and effort consuming. Introduce the stakeholders, catch the problems while they are relatively easy to fix, and reduce the time on content development.

Disadvantages

Approaching RP as trial and error: To some, following RP might appear as a trial and error method for getting a prototype approved by the client. While following RP, one needs to understand and constantly remind oneself that nothing can replace sound instructional strategy for a given learning situation and also that RP does not eliminate the need of an extensive analysis phase before heading for the design phase. So, RP is not a short cut to the instructional design and development process if you compromise on the sound instructional principles. Although using RP might give you a feeling that you can be less disciplined and repair the faulty designs by feedback, treating RP with this approach demeans the purpose and advantages of using RP—to create an effective instruction in lesser time.

Leading to frustration in developers: Because there are multiple iterations that happen in the design and developed content concurrently, some developers (content developers, graphic designers, and content technologists) might feel frustrated doing multiple revisions of the same content piece. Some might feel why leave a room for improvement and why not do everything in a perfect shape at the first go. However, that is neither the intent nor the approach that is followed for RP. Trying to achieve perfection the first time defeats the advantages of RP as well—to make design perfect, you will spend more time and effort; and also, you might try to fix the parameters in the prototype that need to be discussed with the stakeholders. So, to work on a RP project, it works well to have experience in RP or work with someone experienced in RP to understand where to draw the line of achieving perfection while developing the prototypes.