The clinical use of motivational messages: an inquiry into the validity of the ARCS model of motivational design

Instruction, even when prepared according to sound instructional design principles, often does not stimulate students' motivation to learn. A motivational intervention, developed according to the processes outlined inthe ARCS model of motivational design, was implemented and tested following the conventions of an embedded single-case study. It was tested with a group of 15 adults participating in a staff development course conducted within the Mozambique Ministry of Education. Results, based on concurrent and discriminant analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data, indicated that the primary treatment, motivational messages, had positive effects on student attitude and performance. It may be concluded that the specific intervention and the ARCS model which provided the basis for designing it provide a sound basis for positively influencing student motivation to learn.

[1]  J. Keller.  Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn , 1987 .

[2]  J. Brophy,et al.  Conceptualizing student motivation , 1983 .

[3]  John M. Keller,et al.  Motivation and instructional design: A theoretical perspective , 1979 .

[4]  Barbara L. McCombs,et al.  Processes and skills underlying continuing intrinsic motivation to learn: Toward a definition of motivational skills training interventions , 1984 .

[5]  Leslie J. Briggs.  Thirty Years of Instructional Design: One Man's Experience. , 1980 .

[6]  Raymond J. Wlodkowski.  Making sense out of motivation: A systematic model to consolidate motivational constructs across theories , 1981 .

[7]  Dee H. Andrews,et al.  A comparative analysis of models of instructional design , 1980 .

[8]  John M. Keller,et al.  The systematic process of motivational design , 1987 .

[9]  Robert M. Gagné,et al.  The Conditions of Learning and Theory of Instruction , 1985 .

[10]  Charles M. Reigeluth,et al.  Instructional Design Theories and Models : An Overview of Their Current Status , 1983 .

[11]  Frank T. Wydra,et al.  Learner Controlled Instruction , 1980 .

[12]  James O. Carey,et al.  The systematic design of instruction , 1978 .

[13]  Charles M. Reigeluth,et al.  Educational technology at the crossroads: New mindsets and new directions , 1989 .

[14]  J. Keller.  Motivational Design of Instruction , 1983 .

[15]  Charles M. Reigeluth.  In search of a better way to organize instruction: The elaboration theory , 1979 .

[16]  Pamela Freyd,et al.  Logo processes and composition processes: effect on revision of making the analogy explicit—a pilot study with sixth grade students , 1989 .

[17]  Roy M. Bohlin.  Motivation in instructional design: Comparison of an American and a soviet model , 1987 .

[18]  Robert Heinich,et al.  Technology and the management of instruction , 1973 .

[19]  Robert F. Mager,et al.  Explorations in Student-Controlled Instruction , 1963 .

[20]  Raymond J. Wlodkowski.  Enhancing adult motivation to learn : a guide to improving instruction and increasing learner achievement , 1987 .

[21]  B. L. Martin,et al.  Instructional theories. maximizing their strengths for application , 1984 .

[22]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .