ARCS

The educational technology and digital learning wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Draft

Definition

ARCS is an instructional design model developped by John Keller and that focuses on motivation.

ARCS stands for: Attention, Relevance, Confidence, Satisfaction

The ARCS Model of Motivational Design

(This needs to be rewritten sometimes, it's basically just a potpourri from links you can find below - Daniel K. Schneider 23:19, 14 August 2007 (MEST))

Attention (perspectual arousal, inquiry arousal, variability)

As in Gagne's model (nine events of instruction) one must gain the learner's attention and keep it. A few pedagogic methods are:

  • Provide variety (e.g. in the teaching materials used and within these materials, e.g. see textbook writing tutorial
  • Create mystery by presenting interesting case problems.
  • Use different methodes to instruction
  • Engage learners in active participation, e.g. questions, role-play
  • Use interesting examples or cases (in particular some that run contrary to learner's expectations)
  • Use humour
Relevance (goal orientation, motive orientation, familiarity)

The learner has to believe that learning is relevant. A few pedagogic methods are:

  • Relate new information to something the student is familiar with, in particular how they reuse previous knowledge and skills.
  • Make sure that the learner can relate instruction to personal learning goals.
Confidence (learning requirements, success opportunities, personal control)

Learners should feel that they could achieve the learning goals. A few pedagogic methods are:

  • Provide opportunities for success
  • Make clear what kind of sub-learning goals are expected and make clear that learning may involve climing small steps.
  • Give learners some control over their own learning
  • Provide precise feedback
Satisfaction (intrinsic reinforcement, extrinsic rewards, equity)

Learners should receive awards. A few pedagogic methods are:

  • Let learners apply newly acquired skill
  • Assess with a score and hand out praise (if deserved)


Subcomponents

According to Huang (2006),

the ARCS model is mostly applied as a design guideline for developing effective motivational strategies (Song & Keller, 2001). In addition to the four ARCS components (ie, attention, relevance, confidence and satisfaction), there are subcategories attached to each component to facilitate the design process. Small (2000) summarised all four components and subcategories as follows.

  • Attention: perceptual arousal, inquiry arousal and variability;
  • Relevance: goal orientation and motive matching;
  • Confidence: learning requirements, success opportunities and personal responsibility; and
  • Satisfaction: intrinsic reinforcement, extrinsic rewards and equity.

See also: Flow theory

Methods

The Instructional Material Motivational Survey (IMMS) (Keller, 1933) contains is a 36 Likert-scale statements. Each statement measures an individual ARCS component.

Huang et al. (2006), published a modified version, which they claim to be more appropriate for studies in higher education. Here is sample of 4 items:

  • When I first looked at (M-Tutor), I had the impression that it would be easy for me. (confidence)
  • There was something interesting at the beginning of (M-Tutor) that got my attention. (attention)
  • Completing the exercises in (M-Tutor) gave me a satisfying feeling of accomplishment. (satisfaction)
  • It is clear to me how the content of (M-Tutor) is related to things I already know. (relevance)

Links

References

  • Chang, M. & Lehman, J. D. (2002). Learning foreign language through an interactive multimedia program: an experimental study on the effects of the relevance component of the ARCS model. CALICO Journal, 20, 81-98.
  • ChanMin Kim and John M. Keller. Effects of motivational and volitional email messages (MVEM) with personal messages on undergraduate students' motivation, study habits and achievement. British Journal of Educational Technology DOI 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00701.x
  • Driscoll, M. (1994). Psychology of learning for instruction. (1st edition). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Driscoll, M. P. (2000). Introduction to theories of learning and instruction (2nd ed.). In M.P. Driscoll (Ed.), Psychology of learning for instruction (pp. 3-28). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Fritz, Constance (1997), Motivation To Learn, University of Saskatchewan, Term paper, HTML, retrieved 22:43, 14 August 2007 (MEST).
  • Huang, Wenhao; Huang, Wenyeh; Diefes-Dux, Heidi; Imbrie, Peter K. (2006). A Preliminary Validation of Attention, Relevance, Confidence and Satisfaction Model-Based Instructional Material Motivational Survey in a Computer-Based Tutorial Setting, British Journal of Educational Technology, v37 n2 p243-259 Mar 2006.
  • Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: an overview of their current status (pp. 386-434). Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Keller, J. and T. Kopp, An Application of the ARCS Model of Motivational Design, in C. Reigeluth (ed.), Instructional Design Theories and Models, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 289-320, 1987.
  • Keller, J. M. (1987a). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn. Performance and Instruction, 26, 1-7.
  • Keller, J. M. (1987b). The systematic process of motivational design. Performance and Instruction, 26, 9/10, 1-8.
  • Keller, J. M. (1993). Motivation by design. Unpublished manuscript, Florida State University, Florida.
  • Song, S. H. (2000). Research issues of motivation in web-based instruction. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 1, 225-229.
  • Song, S. H. & Keller, J. M. (2001). Effectiveness of motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction on the dynamic aspects of motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49, 5. [ISI