DICK AND CAREY’S SYSTEMATIC INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN MODEL
As the title states, this is an instructional design (ID) model not an
instructional systems design (ISD) model. Its concentration is on the goal,
specifically, what it is that they want the students to know or what tasks they want
the students to be able to perform after the training has been conducted. The
model describes essential steps that instructional designers should go through
when designing instruction. This nine-step process should be followed as
indicated by the arrows in the model (Dick, 1997, fig. 17.1, p. 365):
Revising
Instruction
Conducting
Instructional
Analysis
Identifying
Instructional
Goal
Writing
Performance
Objectives
Developing
CriterionReferenced
Tests
Developing
Instructional
Strategy
Developing
and Selecting
Instruction
Designing
and
Conducting
Formative
Evaluation
Identifying
Entry
Behaviors
Dick and Carey systematic design model
Designing
and
Conducting
Summative
Evaluation
Note. Designing and Conducting Summative Evaluation is not one of the nine
steps in this model which is why it is attached using a dashed arrow. The
instructional designer is generally not a part of this process and therefore it is not
considered a component of ID. However, it is the final determination of the
success of the instruction.
The procedures and techniques prescribed in the nine steps are:
Identify an Instructional Goal: The first step, as I explained
above, is to identify the goal of the instruction. This can be determined from a
pre-established list of goals, through a needs assessment, job analysis, through
worker/trainee identified deficiencies or in some other method (Dick, 1997).
Conduct an Instructional Analysis: Next, the type of learning to
achieve the goal must be determined and the goal is examined to identify all the
steps that will be required to complete it. This evaluation includes a subordinate
skills analysis to discover the skills that will be necessary in completing the goal
(Dick, 1997). The data collected will provide a detailed listing of all required skills
and show how they correlate to one another.
Identify Entry Behaviors and Characteristics: This step collects
data concerning the prerequisite skills that are needed prior to a learner
attending the training. It also collects facts about the learners themselves that
might aide in the development of, and determine the delivery method for, the
course instruction.
Write Performance Objectives: Using the information gathered in
the two prior steps, precise details for what the learners will be expected to know
are established. These written objectives consist of behaviors to be learned,
conditions for them to be performed, and the measure that must be achieved.
Develop Criterion-Referenced Assessments: Here assessment
tools that can measure and correspond to the learner’s aptitude to master the
objectives are created (Dick, 1997). The relationship between the required
learned behaviors and the required performance should be stressed.
Develop an Instructional Strategy: Developing a strategy
involves using data from the first five steps with emphasis placed on the
presentation of the instruction, practice, feedback, and testing. It should be based
on current research findings, course objectives, and the specific needs and traits
of the learner’s as described in the Identify Entry Behaviors and Characteristics
step.
Develop and/or Select Instruction: The strategy developed in the
last step aides in the instructional development process that includes the
preparation of instructional materials, tests, and teaching steps (Dick, 1997).
Depending on the instruction, there may already be existing instructional
materials such as manufacturer’s literature. However, funds and the availability of
other resources will definitely have to be taken into consideration in this step.
Design and Conduct the Formative Evaluation: This step is what
I would refer to as the validation step since it is used to evaluate the tentative
course of instruction. Dick (1997) uses three phases of evaluation in this step:
one-to-one, small group, and field trial. The goal is to collect and implement
unique data to enhance the instruction.
Revise the Instruction: This is the final step in which all the data
gathered from the formative evaluation is put to work, to fix any problems
identified in the instruction. It is also when all the steps are reviewed to ensure
that the previously collected data and developed products are still viable. All
areas identified as needing improvement are re-analyzed and changes are
incorporated into the revision of the instruction, which hopefully by this point, is
as good as it can get.
EXAMPLE OF MODEL IN USE: I am presently working the re-write of a
ten month long, Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) awarding course. An AFSC is
the career field of an Airman. This course had a very high attrition rate that
prompted the career field manager and the schoolhouse to do an analysis of the
problem.
The team had to determine the instructional goal (step 1) of the course.
While doing this they realized that they were over training the students and
holding them to too high a level. As a result, they lowered the proficiency codes
for the task items to be trained (step 2) to the appropriate level. It was also
determined that the electrical score on the Armed Forces Vocational Aptitude
Battery (ASVAB) which is used to determine if someone has an aptitude for
electrical work, was too low, so they were able to get the Air Force to raise it to a
more realistic score (step 3). Now they had to re-write the performance
objectives to meet the new training standards (step 4). This in-turn led to
establishing new criterion-referenced assessments to evaluate the performance
objectives (step 5). Looking at the five previous steps, they realized that they
needed to make a change in the scheduling of the tests. In the old course, a
student would spend a week learning five pieces of equipment and then test on
all of them at the end. In the new course, the students are tested after each
individual piece of equipment (step 6). The student’s get manufacturer’s literature
for every piece of equipment along with easy to use handouts and note-taking
guides (step 7). Each new course or course re-write has a three-class validation
period to identify problems or deficiencies in training (step 8). After validation, all
the data is collected, analyzed and implemented as necessary to improve the
training as much as possible (step 9).
RESOURCE:
Dick, W. (1997). A model for the systematic design of instruction. In R.
Tennyson, F. Schott, N. Seel, & S. Dijkstra (Eds.), Instructional design:
International perspective (Vol 1) (pp. 361-369). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.