Dick and Carey,
Course Type & Modality
A working application of the Dick and Carey Model to Decoding the Code — a structured literacy minicourse for secondary educators serving struggling readers and students with dyslexia.
A remixed view of the Dick and Carey systems-design model — ten steps, iterative feedback loops, and not as linear as it looks.
Ten steps in plain English
The Dick and Carey Model is a systems-based instructional design framework. Each step feeds the next, and formative evaluation feeds the whole thing back upstream. Here is what each step actually means when you sit down to design a course.
Identify Instructional Goals
Decide what learners need to walk out knowing. Not what's nice to know. What's necessary.
Conduct Instructional Analysis
Map every subskill that sits underneath the goal. Pull the goal apart into its working parts.
Identify Entry Behaviors
Figure out what the learner already brings to the table — prior training, prior misconceptions, prior context.
Write Performance Objectives
State what the learner will do, under what conditions, to what criterion. Vague objectives get vague results.
Develop Criterion-Referenced Tests
Build the assessment directly from the objectives. Same verbs. Same conditions. No surprises on test day.
Develop Instructional Strategy
Decide the moves — how content gets sequenced, how practice happens, how feedback gets delivered.
Develop & Select Materials
Build or curate the deck, the video, the handout, the practice set. Materials must match the strategy.
Formative Evaluation
Pilot with real users in three rounds — one-to-one, small group, field trial. Watch where it breaks.
Revise Instruction
Take the formative feedback and fix what didn't work. This step is what makes the model a system, not a checklist.
Summative Evaluation
After revision, run the final evaluation to see whether the course actually moves the needle for the learner.
What this model means for instructional design
The Dick and Carey Model treats instruction as a system, not a checklist. Every component has to line up with every other one, and the whole thing gets tested before it ships.
- Alignment is the whole point. If the objective says apply but the test only asks the learner to define, the system is broken. Dick and Carey forces designers to keep objectives, assessment, and instruction in the same verb tense.
- Iteration is built in, not bolted on. Formative evaluation is step 8, not an afterthought. That single feature pushes designers to test their work with real learners before final deployment — exactly what most school-based professional development skips entirely.
- Entry behaviors get their own step. The model refuses to assume a uniform starting line. For secondary teacher PD — where one teacher has Orton-Gillingham training and another has never heard the word phoneme — this matters a lot.
- The model is replicable. A designer can hand the documentation to someone else and the course can be rebuilt, re-evaluated, and revised without the original designer in the room.
Where the model fits — and where it strains
Honest evaluation of how Dick and Carey supports and challenges the design of a self-paced structured literacy minicourse for practicing secondary teachers.
What works for this minicourse
- The performance objective approach matches what is already planned: learners will identify a struggling secondary reader's profile, select an evidence-aligned move, and apply it in their next class period.
- Step 3 (entry behaviors) is built for an audience like this one — secondary teachers with wildly uneven prior training in the Science of Reading.
- Steps 8 and 9 give a built-in pilot loop. The minicourse can run with a small cohort of ELAR teachers in Alvin ISD before going wider, and revisions happen before public release.
- The tight goal-to-assessment alignment supports the measurable outcome the course needs to meet TEA Dyslexia Handbook expectations.
Where the model strains
- The model was built for systematic, team-based ID work in places like the military and large industry. This minicourse is being built by a solo designer on a fast timeline.
- The first five steps front-load analysis. For adult learners who already have years of classroom experience, too much analysis upfront can slow the build and stall production.
- The model has behaviorist roots. Adult educators learn through reflection, dialogue, and collaboration, so Dick and Carey has to be paired with constructivist moves to keep the course feeling human and not like a stimulus-response loop.
- Ten steps can feel rigid for a course that has to keep room for teacher voice and choice. UDL has to be designed in alongside it, not after.
How the course actually gets delivered
Working drafts for the Instructional Design Document. Both choices are justified against the audience and the learning gap.
Self-paced asynchronous professional development minicourse
Four short modules. Teacher-ready toolkit at the end. Learners move through the content on their own clock and finish with materials they can use in their next class period.
Why this is the right typeSecondary content teachers do not have a shared block of time. They have planning periods, lunches, evenings, and the occasional summer Saturday. A self-paced format is the only format that respects that reality. It also lets a teacher with prior structured literacy training skip what they already know and go straight to application, while a teacher new to the work can slow down without holding anyone up (International Dyslexia Association, 2020).
Fully online & asynchronous, with optional live coaching
Hosted in a learning platform such as Articulate Rise or Canvas. Built with UDL principles from the start — captioned video, downloadable transcripts, visual organizers, and three submission formats for the final task. One optional 30-minute live coaching call per module gives learners who want real-time feedback a path in without forcing it on the ones who don't.
Why this is the right modalitySecondary reading gaps are a nationwide problem, not a Texas problem. An online asynchronous modality lets a teacher in Houston take the same course as a teacher in rural Arkansas. It also matches the working conditions of the audience and meets the accessibility standards a course on dyslexia must hold itself to (CAST, 2018; Texas Education Agency, 2024).
Sources
- CAST. (2018). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.2. https://udlguidelines.cast.org
- Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2015). The systematic design of instruction (8th ed.). Pearson.
- International Dyslexia Association. (2020). Dyslexia basics. https://dyslexiaida.org/dyslexia-basics/
- Texas Education Agency. (2024). The dyslexia handbook: Procedures concerning dyslexia and related disorders. Texas Education Agency.