The Dick and Carey Model
An Instructional Systems Design
Model
Who Are Dick & Carey?
 Walter Dick: Studied
with Robert Gagne.
Emeritus Professor at
Florida State University.
 Lou Carey: Studied
with Walter Dick and
Robert Gagne. University
of South Florida Professor
and Interim Dean.
Dick & Carey Model
 “Performance-oriented model, stressing the identification of skills
students need to learn and the collection of data from students to
revise instruction”
 Based on the reductionist perspective, which emphasizes
breaking instruction down into smaller components.
 Focuses on the skills, knowledge, attitudes that need to be
learned and provides the right learning conditions for the
outcomes.
 “Based on the idea that there is a predictable and reliable link
between a stimulus (instructional materials) and the response that
it produces in a learner (learning of materials).”
Dick & Carey, Past and Present
 First Edition, 1978: Very traditional ISD approach,
with emphasis on behavioral theory and some
cognitivist theories.
 Second Edition, 1996: Still traditional, reflects an
attempt to incorporate changes in the field, such
as shifts toward constructivism, growth in
computers, etc.
Dick & Carey Model
Conduct
Instructional
analysis
Revise
Instruction
Develop
Assessment
instruments
Assess needs to
Identify goals
Write
Performance
Objectives
Analyze learners
And contexts
Develop
Instructional
strategy
Develop and
Select
Instructional
materials
Design and
Conduct
Formative
Evaluation of
instruction
Design and
Conduct
Summative
evaluation
Shell Island Simulation
 Contexts for Dick & Carey Model seem to endless.
 Shell Island is a good example of how modify the traditional
ISD approach with constructivist goals.
 Part of a reform project by Carolina Coastal Science
project with a goal to create an online environment for
primary and secondary students to engage in authentic
scientific inquiry.
Shell Island Dilemma
 Students investigate the fate of the Shell Island Resort
through the resources available on NCS website.
 After considering the scientific, social, political issues, they
engage in a debate over its future.
QuickTime™ and a
Cinepak decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Shell Island D&C Model
 Determining Instructional
Goals
Determined out of a lack of
good environmental science
curricular and inquiry-based
simulations in North Carolina
secondary schools.
Instructional goal is for
learners to be able to identify
the scientific, social, political,
and moral issues that
“different stakeholders must
deal with in a current
environmental science
issue.”
1
 Analyzing the Instructional
Goal
Students identify
environmental and
economic concerns of
stakeholders.
Students take a position for
or against building a hard
structure to protect the Shell
Island Resort.
Shell Island D&C Model
 Analyze Learners and
Context
Use technology skills and
critical thinking skills to
explore online resources
and construct a logical
argument for unresolved
issue.
Use decision-making skills
to act on personal and
social interests.
2
 Write Performance
Objectives
Students will list the 3
strongest arguments for
and against building a
hard structure to protect
Resort.
Students will identify
individuals for and
against.
Students will prepare
statement for next course
of action.
Shell Island D&C Model
 Developing Assessment
Instruments
Students complete a
“Position Statement
Handout” designed to assess
stated objectives for an in
class debate.
Students complete a
“Student Record Sheet
Assessment” at the
conclusion of debate.
3
 Developing Instructional
Strategy
Terminal Objectives:
Design role-playing activity
Select unresolved issue
Collect background info
Develop real-life scenario
Identify roles of real
people (stakeholders)
Develop student roles
Select Debate format with
time limits
Shell Island D&C Model
 Developing and Selecting
Instruction
Materials are developed in
the context of “The Shell
Island Dilemma” web site,
with many resources for
students
Educator’s Guide is
provided, recommending
teaching strategies and
assesments
4
 Designing and
Conducting Formative
Evaluation
Included a small group of
primary and secondary
school educators enrolled in
a ET graduate course.
They made
recommendations to modify
program
Shell Island D&C Model
 Revising Instruction
Upon recommendations by
group:
Specific descriptions of
stakeholders were
developed.
“Student Record Sheet
Assessment”’ was
developed.
Debate simulation was
tested on 10th grade
environmental science
class.
“Position Statement
Handout” was created.
5
 Conducting Summative
Evalution
Conducted by marine
education specialist, a
coastal geologist, a university
professor with C&I expertise,
and two secondary school
environmental science
teachers.
No further
recommendations were
made.
Dick & Carey Model
 Advantages
Can be applied in
almost any context.
Can adjust well for
changes in theory or
technology.
Has been around a
long time.
 Disadvantages
Learning is nonlinear.
Presumes that
learning is
predictable and
reliable.
Does not allow for
mistakes.
References
 Carey, L. & Dick, W. (1996). The Systematic Design of Instruction.
Longman; New York, NY.
 Bodzin, A.M. & Park, J.C. (1999). An Online Inquiry Instructional System for
Environmental Issues. Meridian: 2(2).
http://www.ncsu.edu/meridian/jul199/coastal/bodzinparkbio.html.
Retrieved 09/25/07.
 Dempsey, J.V. & Reiser, R.A. (2007). Trends and Issues in Instructional
Design and Technology. Pearson; Upper Saddle River, NJ.
 McGriff, S.J. (2001). ISD Knowledge Base/ Instructional Systems Design
Models/ Dick & Carey.
http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/s/j/sjm256/portfolio/kbase/IDD/dick
&carey.html. Retrieved 09/25/07.
 Reiber, L. http://lreiber.myweb.uga.edu/edit6170/ppt/unitgoal_analysis.ppt. Retrieved 09/25/07.