Summary:
Taking into account the high attrition rate in online courses and the fact that attrition is often caused by a lack of motivation, Kim and Frick (2011) investigate learner motivation in online learning. The first section of this reading is a literature review and the second section describes the actual study.
The literature review discusses internal, external, and personal factors that influence motivation in Web-based instructions. One internal factor is that instruction is more motivating if it applies the ARCS model (attention, relevance, confidence, satisfaction) or Merril’s first principles. On the other hand, “cognitive overload” can decrease motivation to learn (p.3). External factors such as technical difficulties with the learning environment or lack of support from an employer also influence motivation. Finally, personal factors such as preference for a particular learning style can impact motivation.
The literature review discusses internal, external, and personal factors that influence motivation in Web-based instructions. One internal factor is that instruction is more motivating if it applies the ARCS model (attention, relevance, confidence, satisfaction) or Merril’s first principles. On the other hand, “cognitive overload” can decrease motivation to learn (p.3). External factors such as technical difficulties with the learning environment or lack of support from an employer also influence motivation. Finally, personal factors such as preference for a particular learning style can impact motivation.
The rest of the reading describes the current study in great detail including participants, research instrument, and data collection/analysis methods. Table 2 on page 18 outlines eight instructional design principles based on the findings:
- Provide learners with content that is relevant and useful to them.
- Incorporate multimedia presentations that stimulate learner interest.
- Include learning activities that simulate real-world situations.
- Provide content at a difficulty level which is in a learner's zone of proximal development.
- Provide learners with hands-on activities that engage them in learning.
- Provide learners with feedback on their performance.
- Design the website so that it is easy for learners to navigate.
- If possible, incorporate some social interaction in the learning process (e.g., with an instructor, technical support staff, or an animated pedagogical agent). (p.18).
Critique:
I appreciated table 2, which included practical guidelines for increasing learner motivation based on the study results. These are things I can actually apply to my Web-based courses.
In addition, I found the notion of disruptive innovations very interesting. I think we’re at an exciting point for Web-based instruction where quality is improving and it’s being distributed more widely. Still, the following statistic blew me away: "50% of high school courses will be offered online by 2019" (p.2). That's in eight years from now. 50% seems high to me. What do others think?
Kim, K.-J. & Frick, T. W. (2011). "Changes in Student Motivation During Online Learning." Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(1), 1-24.
Kim, K.-J. & Frick, T. W. (2011). "Changes in Student Motivation During Online Learning." Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(1), 1-24.
Re the 50% statistic: Maybe "offered" but wonder about being "taken." My husband is a high school teacher and the percentage of kids who take advantage of the online courses now offered is very low. His opinion: a highly motivated, self-directed teenager is a strange and unusual animal. The social aspect of high school is still a priority for that age group and that's not likely to change. Even when online courses address problem populations like low performers, remedial learners, working/parenting/pregnant teens, the skills to succeed at self-directed learning are not easily available nor are these kids being properly trained to succeed online. That will have to change dramatically if that figure is to be more than an empty statistic.
ReplyDeleteThat's very interesting. Thank you for pointing out the distinction.
ReplyDeleteNicole,
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you singled out Table 2, because I didn't pay enough attention to it. These are going to challenge me in designing my project on grammar, and keep me nervous in a good way. I'm especially drawn to the concept of incorporating multimedia, and will need to think deeply about it because it's still a weakness. Then again: an animated pedagogical agent? Really? In a professional setting like mine? That could seem silly real fast, especially among journalists, who aren't easily impressed. Also, animated anything is definitely not my strong suit, unless we're talking stick figures. This will take some serious thought as well.
Thanks for the post!
Kevin