Design Research and RUP

When reading and contemplating Design Research, I am struck with the commonality the concept has to a well known software engineering methodology. Interestingly, evaluating learning science versus instructional design can, in many ways, be connected to the same comparison of RUP vs. the Waterfall software engineering methodology.

RUP (Rational Unified Process) consist of a software development method that is not a single concrete prescription process, but it is a framework intended to tailor the development phase to appropriate trajectory for a specific software development outcome. It differentiates itself from more traditional software methodology, Waterfall, in that is a process of constant adjustments of micro cycles of development followed by an evaluation at the end of a macro cycle.

Like in Design Research, each iteration, or micro cycle, requires the developer to deliver a product to a customer and review assess that activity. Adjustments are made to the software to make more effective for the end user. In this respect, RUP and Design Research are in essence the same methodology with different purposes, one is to produce software the other is to produce learning. Inherently, both processes are intended to be domain specific by the nature of addressing a specific issue within a domain.

Over my career, I have found that RUP is a software development technique effective for obtaining superior results and quicker than other methods in many cases. The method works well for both software development and project management tasks. Knowing this, I can see how Design Research could produce a very effective domain specific learning theory assuming the learning trajectory pursues a clearly state outcome at the end of the process.

IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)
ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/software/rational/web/datasheets/RUP_DS.pdf