Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
Instructional design models are the backbone of how effective teaching gets planned, delivered, and evaluated. You're being tested on understanding why each model works, not just what it contains. These frameworks draw directly from cognitive psychology, motivation theory, and learning science, so expect exam questions that ask you to connect a model's structure to underlying principles like cognitive load, transfer of learning, intrinsic motivation, and constructivist scaffolding.
Don't just memorize acronyms and phase names. Know what problem each model solves: Is it about sequencing instruction? Motivating learners? Evaluating outcomes? Aligning objectives? When you can identify the core purpose of each model, you'll nail both multiple-choice comparisons and FRQ applications asking you to recommend or critique an instructional approach.
These models provide step-by-step frameworks for designing instruction from start to finish. They treat instructional design as an engineering problem: systematic, sequential, and iterative.
The most widely used framework in both corporate and educational settings, ADDIE organizes the design process into five phases: Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation.
A key feature is its iterative feedback loops: designers can circle back to revise at any stage based on evaluation data, rather than plowing forward with a flawed plan. The model also enforces an alignment principle, making sure objectives, assessments, and activities all point in the same direction.
This model applies systems thinking to instruction, meaning every component (goals, assessments, materials, delivery) is treated as interconnected. Changing one element affects all the others, so designers have to think holistically.
Dick and Carey is more prescriptive and detailed than ADDIE, with specific procedures for writing performance objectives and developing criterion-referenced assessments. It's a strong choice when you need to justify a highly structured, research-grounded design process.
Where ADDIE and Dick and Carey follow a roughly linear path, Kemp offers non-linear flexibility. Designers can enter at any point and move between elements in whatever order the project demands.
Compare: ADDIE vs. Kemp: both are comprehensive design frameworks, but ADDIE follows a linear sequence while Kemp allows flexible, non-sequential development. If an FRQ asks about adapting to diverse learner needs mid-project, Kemp is your stronger example.
These models focus on how to structure and sequence instruction to optimize cognitive processing. They're grounded in information processing theory and attention research.
Gagné's model provides nine sequential steps that mirror how the brain processes and stores information:
Each event prepares working memory for the next stage, which is why this model connects directly to cognitive load management. Event 3 (stimulate recall) is a direct application of schema theory: by activating what learners already know, new information has something to attach to.
Bloom's Taxonomy organizes cognitive skills into a hierarchy of six levels (revised version): Remember, Understand, Apply, Analyze, Evaluate, Create.
Its primary use is as an objective-writing tool. When you write a learning objective using Bloom's, you're specifying exactly what cognitive skill students should demonstrate. For example, "Students will analyze the causes of the Civil War" targets a different cognitive level than "Students will list the causes of the Civil War." This distinction matters for designing assessments that match your intended rigor.
Backward Design flips the typical planning process. Instead of starting with content or activities, you start with outcomes: what should students know and be able to do?
The model follows a three-stage process:
This approach is understanding-focused rather than coverage-focused. It pushes teachers to prioritize transfer and application over simply "getting through" material.
Compare: Gagné vs. Bloom: Gagné sequences instruction (what the teacher does during a lesson), while Bloom categorizes cognitive outcomes (what students demonstrate). Use Gagné when asked about lesson structure; use Bloom when asked about assessment design or writing learning objectives.
These models prioritize learner engagement and psychological investment. They draw from self-determination theory, expectancy-value theory, and behavioral reinforcement principles.
ARCS addresses a specific problem: learners who could learn but don't want to. It identifies four components of motivation, each requiring targeted design strategies:
Merrill's model distills research across multiple instructional theories into five principles, organized around problem-centered learning. Instruction should engage learners in solving real-world, authentic problems.
The model follows a four-phase cycle:
Compare: ARCS vs. Merrill: ARCS focuses on motivational conditions (making learners want to engage), while Merrill focuses on cognitive conditions (making learning stick through problem-solving). Both emphasize relevance, but ARCS addresses emotional engagement while Merrill addresses meaningful practice and transfer.
These models emphasize continuous improvement through feedback and assessment. They reflect the principle that instructional effectiveness must be measured, not assumed.
Kirkpatrick provides a framework for evaluating training programs at four ascending levels:
A common problem in practice is the Level 3 and 4 gap: many programs evaluate satisfaction (Level 1) and maybe test scores (Level 2), but never measure whether learners actually transfer skills to the workplace or whether the training moved organizational metrics. Level 4 results data is what justifies training investments to stakeholders and connects to ROI analysis.
SAM was designed as an alternative to ADDIE's front-loaded planning. It uses agile, iterative development where rapid prototyping replaces lengthy upfront design phases.
The model has three phases:
Stakeholder collaboration happens throughout the process, which prevents the "big reveal" failure where a team spends months building something that misses the mark.
Compare: Kirkpatrick vs. SAM: Kirkpatrick evaluates after instruction is delivered, while SAM builds evaluation into the development process through continuous prototyping. For questions about summative program evaluation, use Kirkpatrick; for formative, ongoing improvement, use SAM.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Systematic/Linear Design Process | ADDIE, Dick and Carey |
| Flexible/Non-Linear Design | Kemp, SAM |
| Cognitive Sequencing | Gagné's Nine Events, Bloom's Taxonomy |
| Outcome-First Planning | Backward Design, Dick and Carey |
| Learner Motivation | Keller's ARCS, Merrill's First Principles |
| Problem-Based Learning | Merrill's First Principles |
| Training Evaluation | Kirkpatrick's Four Levels |
| Iterative/Agile Development | SAM, ADDIE (with feedback loops) |
Which two models both emphasize starting with clear learning outcomes but differ in whether they follow a linear or flexible process? What's the key distinction?
A corporate trainer wants to measure whether employees actually apply new skills on the job, not just whether they enjoyed the training. Which model provides the framework for this, and which specific level addresses job performance?
Compare Gagné's Nine Events and Bloom's Taxonomy: How does each one help an educator, and when would you use one versus the other?
An FRQ describes a learner who understands the content but lacks motivation to engage. Which model specifically addresses this problem, and what are its four components?
A design team keeps revising their course after launch because initial planning missed key learner needs. Which model would have helped them catch these issues earlier, and what makes it different from traditional approaches like ADDIE?