Discover the Dick and Carey instructional design model: what it is, its 10 steps, key advantages, real challenges, and how to decide if it fits your
The Dick and Carey model is a ten-step, systems-based framework for designing effective training programs. It ensures that every element of a course, from goal-setting to final evaluation, is deliberately connected and measurable. Developed by Walter Dick and Lou Carey, the model is also known as the Systems Approach Model and remains one of the most structured options available to instructional designers working in corporate and academic settings.
The Dick and Carey model is a systematic instructional design framework that breaks the development of a learning program into ten interconnected steps, emphasizing the relationship between each component rather than treating them in isolation.
Walter Dick and Lou Carey introduced the model in 1978, grounding it in behavioral and systems theory. The core idea is that instructional design is not a linear checklist but a system: changing one element affects all others. The model therefore requires designers to revisit earlier decisions whenever a later stage reveals a gap, making revision a built-in feature rather than an afterthought.
The Dick and Carey model is widely used in corporate learning and development, government training programs, and higher education because of its methodological rigor. Its emphasis on measurable performance objectives and criterion-referenced assessment means that learning outcomes can be verified against real-world requirements, not just course completion rates.
Compared to the broader ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation) model, Dick and Carey provides a more detailed breakdown of the analysis and design phases, which is particularly useful for complex or high-stakes training projects.
The Dick and Carey model organizes instructional design into ten steps that move from initial goal identification through continuous revision. Each step feeds into the next, and the model expects designers to loop back when evaluation reveals weaknesses.
The process begins by identifying what learners should be able to do at the end of the instruction. Goals are derived from a needs assessment that compares current performance with the desired performance standard. This step anchors everything that follows.
Once goals are set, designers analyze the tasks, skills, and knowledge required to achieve them. This involves breaking each goal into subordinate skills and mapping the sequence in which learners must acquire them. The output is a skill hierarchy that guides content structure.
This step examines who the learners are, what they already know, and the environment in which they will learn and apply new skills. Understanding entry behaviors, attitudes, and performance context prevents the common mistake of designing instruction for an idealized audience rather than the actual one.
Based on the instructional analysis, designers write specific, measurable performance objectives. Each objective states what the learner will do, under what conditions, and to what standard. These objectives drive assessment design and instructional strategy equally.
Assessments are developed directly from the performance objectives, not from the instructional content. This criterion-referenced approach ensures that tests measure whether learners can perform the targeted skill, not merely whether they remember information presented in a lesson.
Designers select the instructional approach: how content will be pre-taught, presented, practiced, and reinforced. The strategy specifies the sequencing of content, the choice of delivery methods, and the learner activities that will build toward each objective.
Instructional materials are created or sourced to match the strategy defined in Step 6. This includes written guides, e-learning modules, videos, job aids, or any combination suited to the learning context identified in Step 3.
Before full-scale rollout, the instruction is tested in three phases: one-on-one evaluation with a small group of learners, small-group evaluation, and field trials. Each phase collects data on clarity, pacing, and effectiveness, and findings feed directly into revisions.
Data from formative evaluation is used to identify and correct weaknesses in objectives, materials, assessments, or strategy. This iterative revision cycle is one of the model's defining characteristics and a key reason it produces reliable outcomes in complex projects.
After revisions, summative evaluation measures the overall effectiveness of the instructional program against its original goals. Unlike formative evaluation, which is part of development, summative evaluation is typically conducted independently to judge whether the program should be continued, scaled, or replaced.
The Dick and Carey model's primary advantage is its systematic alignment: goals, objectives, assessments, and instructional strategies are explicitly connected at every stage, which reduces the risk of courses that feel complete but fail to produce measurable skill transfer.
Key benefits include:
These strengths make the Dick and Carey model especially valuable in regulated industries, compliance training, and any context where learning outcomes need to be demonstrated rather than assumed. Lemon Learning's approach to corporate learning and development reflects many of these same principles: clear objectives, contextual delivery, and measurable outcomes.
The Dick and Carey model requires significant time and expertise. Each of the ten steps demands documentation, validation, and often iteration, which can extend timelines considerably compared to more flexible frameworks.
Specific challenges include:
Understanding these limitations is essential before committing to the model. A thorough review of instructional design principles and frameworks can help teams decide whether the Dick and Carey approach fits their specific context or whether a lighter model would serve better.
The Dick and Carey model is the right choice when a project is complex, high-stakes, and requires demonstrable learning outcomes. It is less appropriate when speed, flexibility, or minimal documentation are priorities.
Use the table below to compare the three most common systematic instructional design models:
| Model | Structure | Best for | Key limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dick and Carey | 10 interconnected steps with revision loops | Complex, high-stakes, or regulated training programs | Time and resource intensive |
| ADDIE | 5 broad phases | General-purpose instructional design | Less prescriptive; quality depends on team practice |
| SAM (Successive Approximation Model) | Iterative sprints with rapid prototyping | Agile teams and frequently updated content | Less rigorous alignment between objectives and assessment |
The ADDIE model offers a well-tested alternative when teams need a structured but faster process. SAM is the better option when stakeholder feedback loops and rapid prototyping matter more than exhaustive upfront analysis.
When selecting between these models, consider four factors: project complexity, available time, team expertise in instructional design, and how strictly outcomes need to be measured. The Dick and Carey Systems Approach Model earns its reputation precisely in the scenarios where those four factors demand rigor over speed.
For teams exploring how systematic instructional design principles translate into practical project execution, the step-by-step guide to executing an instructional design project provides a concrete operational framework to complement the theoretical structure the Dick and Carey model supplies.
The most widely used instructional design models are ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation), the Dick and Carey Systems Approach Model, SAM (Successive Approximation Model), and the Kemp Design Model. ADDIE is often considered the default starting point for new instructional designers because of its clear, phase-based structure.
Ralph Tyler's curriculum model, outlined in his 1949 work 'Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction,' follows four steps: (1) define educational purposes, (2) identify learning experiences that meet those purposes, (3) organize the experiences effectively, and (4) evaluate whether the purposes have been achieved. It is considered a forerunner of later systematic models like Dick and Carey.
The 5E instructional model organizes teaching into five phases: Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, and Evaluate. Originally developed for science education, it is now used across disciplines as a constructivist framework that encourages learners to build understanding through active inquiry rather than passive reception.
Both models follow a systems approach to instructional design, but the Dick and Carey model is more granular, breaking the process into ten explicit steps with built-in formative evaluation and revision loops throughout. ADDIE uses five broader phases and is generally more flexible, making it faster to apply for smaller or time-sensitive projects. Dick and Carey is better suited to complex, high-stakes learning programs that require rigorous alignment between goals, content, and assessment.
Intuitive software design isn't enough to guarantee adoption. Discover the 4 reasons users avoid new tools and how a digital adoption platform can...
Learn the differences between Customer Data Platforms and Data Management Platforms (CDP vs DMP). Discover how DMPs manage Internet user data to...
What is a learning curve? Discover its 4 stages, types, and practical strategies to accelerate professional development and reduce training costs