Four distinct cases are discussed when determining effectiveness of instruction in mastery vs. nonmastery using pretests and posttests.
- Student Nonmastery = Student Mastery
- Student Nonmastery = Student Nonmastery
- Student Mastery = Student Mastery
- Student Mastery = Student Nonmastery
After discussing the pretests and posttests, compiling of the prototype is discussed. The general consent is that enough information should be provided to effectively test usability. Additionally, several "strands" will be included, specifically the the strand that delves the deepest. Using codes to represent links, and including these codes on tabs within the paper prototype is also discussed.
The actual testing of the paper prototype relies on the evaluator, to provide the volunteer with the paper prototype. The evaluator will document the volunteer's paths, comments while working, and attitude toward the prototype. A pilot session is strongly encourages, to work out the kinks of the entire process. Evaluators should be aware of techniques regarding noncommittal responses, prompting, and probing. These techniques commonly prove beneficial when gathering information during the prototype testing phase. After the testing phase is complete, the evaluator will go through 5 steps.
- Assemble Data
- Identify Patterns
- Define Problems
- Diagnose Design Problems
- Prioritize Revisions.
Prior to this reading, I was extremely critical of a paper prototype. How effective can an out-of-context website be? In my view it is like a book that has been adapted to a screen production, there is always information left out. However, after reading these chapters, I began to understand the benefits of a paper prototype. Common user difficulties and other instructional errors may be noticed before continuing to the actual design phase of the website. A paper prototype may save a lot of time and effort when properly used.
Using a notebook or 3 ring binder to create your rough draft seems feasible and realistic. I am still reserved in the idea that a paper prototype would be needed to discover linking errors and such. I think the actual links and other items should be followed on the computer and tested at great length, but I'm also paranoid about dead-end links. The information I gathered through this reading will be put to use for our paper prototype. The use that I saw for the paper prototype that most directly impacts me is simply for the planning stage of a website. It would be beneficial to have a visual layout and corresponding information for a site before I begin developing it. I am an individual who typically writes a paper before my outline, so I typically develop a mock-up for my own visualization rather than try to break it down into pieces. I suppose I am a "big picture" person.
Frick & Boling (2011). Effective web instruction: Handbook for an inquiry-based process. Indiana University.