Handbook of Educational Technology and Communications
“User-Design Research”
Alison Carr-Chellman and Michael Savoy
http://www.aect.org/edtech/27.pdf

In order to design a product for use, one must have a user group. Without a user group, the designer is simply creating clanging cymbals, when with a bit of research, a symphony could be born. Yes, users are strategic in the design of any computer program. Carr-Chellman and Savoy’s research identified a major flaw in creation of learning materials, the end user was traditionally over looked in the design process. Designers who closely followed the instructional science method, traditionally found problems and created solutions without consulting the group that was the most important to the project, the user. Rather than creating something that would include users in the solution, administrators traditionally imposed their will, in this case a program, on the end user or learner. This then results in something done to, rather than with, the learner.

One point the article implies is that instructional designers must involve users in the design process. However, to ask the user to design the instruction, would be a waste of time and resources. Too often the savvy user id ignored and the program is dummied-down to the beginning user. There needs to be a balance of users and designers working together to create and perfect instructional design models. Ideally, the designers themselves should be users. This will increase ownership for the designer as well as the user. Once ownership is created in the project, the likelihood of a user friendly, high quality product increases.

The article focuses on the Scandinavian User Design model. In this model the government has gone so far as to mandate that users be included in the development of instructional design. Involving users in the design process does have its negative side. In some cases there is a power struggle to deal with. In others, a product comes to completion before user design enters the process. Another drawback may be that the knowledge level of the users may affect user design.

The authors conclude with their “belief that user design offers us the clearest, most hopeful way to approach design with faithful inclusion and, consequently, more consistent and facile adoption and implementation.”