It was originally created to offer an immediate record, but now the regular itforum web version (which also has an index) is probably more historically accurate. The version here was re-ordered a bit and given a contents list (as opposed to an index of contributors and dates). My synthesis resulting from the discussion is now in a separate companion document.
Recently someone suggested to me that giving learners confidence was all that matters, and I dismissed it. Two days later, in a focus group with students asking them about the feedback they were getting on a course (in tutorials on their programming exercises) they said almost the same thing: that what mattered to them was getting some confidence from the tutor. This makes a nonsense of my concepts about levels of feedback, and indeed about all the theories of teaching and learning I usually attend to.
Does anyone have something useful to say about this? Should I abandon all content and learning objectives, and concentrate on confidence-giving?
Perhaps when students say that confidence is _ALL_ that matters, what they are really saying is that it is the first necessity and they are unable to see beyond this gate until they have passed through it — confidence allows them (in the Aussie vernacular) to "have a go". Other teaching/learning issues then become relevant.
Cheers
Geoff Isaacs
The Teaching and Educational Development Institute (T.E.D.I.)
The University of Queensland
I think this [Geoff's message] is right, but I think it's richer. They need to have confidence to experiment and explore. That's why I think Alan Shoenfeld's work (which I only really know through Collins, Brown, & Newman's Cognitive Apprenticeship) is so important. He models the processes, including making mistakes, backtracking, and revising. This shows that it's not a one-pass success or fail. It's probably also important to give learners an early success to help build their confidence. (Which, it suddenly and horribly occurs to me, is something I probably do wrong with my first assignment when I try to shake their complacency. Sigh. Live and learn. Next year, folks!)
I think that with confidence and time, students could explore and learn anything. With confidence and then support for self-learning skills, efficiency in search, representational facilitation, etc, they might even be able to learn something in the artificial timetable of the average university subject!
Dr Clark N. Quinn
Director of Education Technology, Access Australia Cooperative Multimedia Centre
Dr I.E. Hart, Director, Centre for Media Resources, University of Hong Kong
I have taught foreign language in several countries. My two cents comment is that the role of confidence is so apparent in oral language learning perhaps because performance is so readily observable and it also requires the learner to assume or mimic another linguistic identity. These are two behaviors most people don't do readily. I recall a study reported about 20 years ago where it was found that small amounts of alcohol "loosened the tongue" as it were improving language learners readiness to perform linguistically in the foreign tongue. (I believe the study was conducted at U of Chicago, Illinois, USA).
Once you've got the language learners feeling okay about speaking like someone else, they've still got to have some structure as to what they are learning.
My vote: Both confidence and a plan are as necessary as when studying algebra or literature.
Dr. Henryk R. Marcinkiewicz, Center for Teaching, Learning, & Faculty Development Ferris State University, Big Rapids, Michigan
Henryk R. Marcinkiewicz writes:
>............ the role of confidence is so apparent in oral
language learning perhaps because performance is so readily
observable and it also requires the learner to assume or mimic
another linguistic identity. These are two behaviors most people don't do
readily.
Ten years ago I was lucky enough to have a 6 month attachment to the University of Poitiers with an assignment to make a number of video programs for French teaching in Australia. We planned out the usual list of topics: Food, Markets, Chateaux... but after our children had been in the local country school for a few days it became obvious that there was only one story worth filming - being an Aussie kid in a French country school. Back home I took the videos to an in-service conference of language teachers and if I'd had a truck I could have sold all the tapes off the back that day.
These weren't great movies, but they had one very attractive feature. They showed normal Australian children succeeding in communication in French. In spite of gross and frequent misuse of the subjunctive, their friends understood them. (The dirty secret of language teaching is that people will understand you if even you don't speak proper, so long as you have the confidence to speak in the first place.) Most language videos use native speakers as models, and a 15 year old, shy, pimple-scarred adolescent from Wagga Wagga is going to have great difficulty identifying with the svelt and fluent Yves De Bois in "À la France!".
We conducted a follow-up survey on these videos and teachers reported that attitudes to learning were very obviously affected: a move as dramatic in once case from "belligerent hostility" to "I could do that!" In other words, confidence.
Of course confidence without content is like pre-selling non-existent apartments in Shenzhen: you get found out in the end. But in language learning it get you going, keeps you talking and facilitates learning.
As for Henry's Uni of Chicago study on liquor and language learning... maybe that's the second dirty secret of language teaching.
Dr I.E. Hart, Director, Centre for Media Resources, University of Hong Kong
From my perspective, we teach because we care. Some care mostly about their areas of "expertise" while others put inordinate amounts of effort into caring about their learners (I think I fall into this latter category), but the transactions in and out of our classrooms will increasingly for many, be conducted at a distance. It is in this environment wherein I see a major role for confidence-building, for motivating, for yes, even inspiring.
Dick Cornell, Instructional Systems, University of Central Florida
Confidence smacks of scam, but trust and, more important, ownership of those learning objectives and increasing ownership of the content involved - by the learner rather than the instructor - make all the difference. That is the process of instruction - in "warm-feeling" vocabulary - just as it is the process of salesmanship or the process of leadership. "Inspiring confidence" among students, buyers, or followers is not that warm and fuzzy goo the rhetoric implies: it is actually transforming your knowledge into theirs. That they do not know how to express this in language which meets IT standards ain't their fault.
Joe Beckmann (oekosjoe@IX.NETCOM.COM)
I think confidence is important. If the learners are not confident that they have mastered a skill I have taught, then how can they go back to the "real world" and apply those skills? That is not to say that content is not important. But learner confidence must be incorporated into the learning process.
In my classroom, if I hear a learner say "oops," I remind them that oops is not a confidence building statement. I suggest "hooray" as an alternative, because they found something that didn't work. In other words, I'm attempting to turn a negative into a positive and hopefully build confidence.
Just my $.02 worth
Jill Ullmann (jullmann@monm.edu)
Following this strand has been interesting, but why should confidence weigh in any higher than attention, relevance or satisfaction (as in Keller's ARCS model)? The function of motivation is to sustain effort as in Carroll's model of school learning, degree of learning is a function of (effort * time allowed) - over - (quality of resources * aptitude * ability to learn).
Indeed learning is a complex equation requiring learner effort AND a facilitating learning environment.
Walter Wager, Instructional Systems, Florida State University
Dr. Wager (and other list participants),
Its not that confidence weighs in more heavily, but confidence is
antecedent to some of the variables in Carroll's equation. Higher levels
of confidence result in greater levels of effort. Higher levels of
confidence will lead individuals to allot greater amounts of time to
learning (if some amount of learner control is available).
With regard to ARCS, a similar arguments can be made. Without confidence, attention will be low. From a cognitive dissonance perspective, I might suggest that those with low confidence will view the material as less relevant (if that's too hard for me to learn, it must not be that important).
I'm not suggesting that confidence is a dominant factor, I am merely suggesting that a great deal of research in educational psychology suggests it may be overlooked by instructional designers. An interesting argument coming from an organizational psychologist ;-)
I'd be curious to hear your reaction to these thoughts.
Kenneth G. Brown, M.A., Doctoral Candidate, Department of Psychology, Michigan State University
I would agree that confidence is confounded with the other variables, but I don't know if I would agree it is antecedent. One can gain confidence during the process of learning but would still have to apply effort - even before that confidence was gained. For example, I could have low confidence in my ability to land a plane, but through the process of practicing many landings with an instructor by my side, gain the confidence I initially lacked. The instructor wouldn't have to build my self-confidence, simply give me feedback as to what to do to make a better landing next time — somehow I think I will know when I have finally learned.
I strongly agree that designers should look at what might increase confidence (including feedback - both corrective and reinforcement for performance). Reinforcement for effort should lead to greater learning, if other parts of the equation are held constant, and effort is directed at learning rather than simply "looking engaged".
Walter Wager, Instructional Systems, Florida State University
I'm enjoying this discussion so much I had to post one more time...
I whole-heartedly agree that confidence can be built over time during training, just as in the example that you present. And, as you suggest, increases in confidence are a natural result of task mastery (or enactive mastery as Bandura would put it).
My focus was on the issue of a learner's choice to engage in learning activity in the first place. It seems like we take the presence of trainees (students) for granted most of the time. Those really low in confidence we probably never see because they see no possible benefit from learning efforts. And, those that do arrive to our doors (terminals, etc.) with low confidence are likely to set low standards that result in fewer experiences of mastery, and so on.
To use the plane example that you brought up... you went out of your way to find an airport and instructor who would teach you those skills. You might not have exerted those efforts (and paid the cash) if you had thought that you could never learn all the things pilots know, or pass the final liscensing exam. I think its easy for researchers, academics, instructional designers, and teachers to forget this because, as a set of professions, we do what we do because we both value learning and feel confident in our ability to do so.
By the way, as a disciplinary "outsider" trying to get a handle on new literature(s) and paradigms, I want to point out that I've found this listserve and discussions on it enjoyable and (even more importantly) useful. Thanks!
Kenneth G. Brown, M.A., Doctoral Candidate, Department of Psychology, Michigan State University
But, motivational effects from self-efficacy do not invalidate concerns for objectives and other instructional design concepts. After all, if we do succeed in motivating trainees (or at least sustaining the motivation they come to us with), then we need to ensure that the effort they invest is productive!
The importance of learner confidence does suggest a need to be sensitive to the type of feedback we provide (as teachers, instructional designers, programmers of CBT) during different stages of skill acquisition. During early stages of skill acquisition, we should consider helping trainees build confidence that they can succeed. If they have confidence, at least they will try.
Zimmerman, B. J. & Schunk, D. H. (1989, Eds.). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Kenneth G. Brown, M.A., Doctoral Candidate, Department of Psychology, Michigan State University
I wonder what relationships exist between lack of confidence in an educational context and the construct called "learned helplessness" that is found in the psychological literature? If anyone is interested, there is a Learned Helplessness Forum listserv and several web resources. For more information, see the following URL: http://www.psych.upenn.edu/~fresco/helplessness.html
Thomas C. Reeves
Dept. of Instructional technology, University of Georgia
Someone on the list (I don't know who as I erased the post) wondered how confidence might be related to learned helplessness. This humble grad student would like to suggest that it relates extremely well. Learned helplessness occurs (if I remember correctly) because the learner has lost the faith that what they do enables them to change their situation. Confidence comes from appropriate informational feedback that helps the learner by confirming what is correct and correcting what is not.
Steve Sturgess, University of Alberta
There is a sizable body of literature supporting the importance of the construct "sense of efficacy" for both students and teachers. Teachers' sense of efficacy has been found to be significantly positively correlated with various positive outcomes including student achievement. There is an organization called "The Efficacy Institute" which is concerned with students' sense of efficacy — primarily that minority students are programmed for low achievement by teachers and others who instill in such students low expectations. This is certainly not "all that matters", however. Content and learning objectives are still important. The importance of learner confidence/sense of efficacy is easilly undervalued though.
Charles Hawkins
>There is a sizable body of literature supporting the importance of the construct "sense of efficacy" for both students and teachers.
I've just been reading the interview with Jeff Howard, founder of the Efficacy Institute that Charles mentions. Interesting stuff!
Jan Robbins
Study Skills Centre, The Australian National University, Canberra, AUSTRALIA
To echo some of the other comments, but add some further conceptual support. Motivational Systems Theory, (Motivating Humans, Martin Ford, 1992, Sage) suggests that both Goals and Personal Agency Beliefs (PABS) are critical components for human motivation. As Martin is an educator first and psychologist second, his ideas are very relevant to us as instructional technologists.
PABs, like Bandura's concept of self-efficacy can be activated by positive encouragement from an influential "other". By encouragement, I mean specific feedback that identifies exactly what the learner did correctly, what needs to be changed, expresses a belief that the learner is, indeed, capable of such change, and identifies contextual mechanisms (for example the availability of the instructor for additional clarification) that will support their progress. (This concept of encouragement is distinctly different than "praise", as has been pointed out by the National Training Laboratory for the Behavioral Sciences).
But a critical point Ford makes is that "personal agency beliefs only matter if there is some goal in place". Clearly you can't activate the PAB as a cognitive and affective process if there is nothing to direct it towards. IMHO here is where the teacher can help provide this activation by setting good instructional objectives which are at some level explicitly known to the learner. After all, if you can't see where you're supposed to be going, how can you possibly feel competent and confident about getting there?
All of this presupposes that the learners are somewhat instrinsically motivated to be in the classroom at all which, as those of us who have instructed both in academic and corporate settings know, is often a dream. But I have personally found that, even those learners who enter the classroom and look at you with the expectation that you will magically pour "learning" into them, can have their level of motivation enhanced by clear objectives supported by encouraging feedback and support.
I'm not suggesting that we should try and turn ourselves into psychologists in order to help our learners achieve the objectives that we set for them. Just that we apply common-sense and caring, whilst being aware of these concepts.
Keep working to make a difference!
Mike Kostrzewa
Heather MacLean [hmaclean@kent.edu]
Now I may just be a cynical, almost finished, undergraduate but I hope that
Steve Draper has not been the victim of "working the tutor".
Everyone knows that you get better marks if you get the confidence of the
tutor - right? So it might not be getting confidence from you, but getting
your confidence that counts.
When I return to my role as teacher, I try to be aware of it being done to
me, but am always admiring of a good technique, hey I might use myself when
I return to my role as student!
Barbara Simmons
Interesting debate! There are two other aspects to student confidence that
I can see.
First, how often have others, like myself, been greeted by blank stares and
inability to perform in a class on a topic you taught to them in the
previous year, only to have them turn around and say "Oh that's what you
mean, yes, we knew that all along." when the penny drops. Confidence seems
to me to relate partly to "knowing that you know" and it seems very
important to have it in order to be able to access and use information.
Secondly, confidence can be an indicator for students that they HAVE learnt
something. It is now integrated and usable if they feel confident
(although sometimes this opinion needs revision in the light of further
testing).
These are both outcomes of learning, unlike the previous uses which seem to
relate mostly to confidence in one's ability to learn. So don't throw away
the content and learning objectives, they could be essential to the
development of the confidence
Jan Robbins
Much of the reading by Deci and Ryan and others that I have done concerning
feedback suggests that it must be, above all, informational. Otherwise it
will be considered to be manipulative. The information in the feedback
could be offered in a variety of ways but must be directed at helping the
student to understand what he/she has done wrong or right and they will use
that information to their advantage. Feedback that confirms what they
believe they know to be correct builds confidence. IMHO, abandoning
learning objectives and all content would of course be counter-productive.
Students need the content but the feedback must always reflect their
understanding of that content in an informational way.
Steve Sturgess (ssturges@oanet.com)
Beverley Oliver, University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle WA 6160
Beverly, I share your doubts about hypertext. There is a lot of
information (category, level of generalisation/detail) contained in the
structure of a discipline or a discourse, and most hypertext does not
usually indicate it. I also think it only really works with learners who
are already confident, if not with the medium, then with the subject. Also
let's be clear, not all hypertext is interactive, and not all interactive
material is hypertext. But perhaps hypertext works better with reference,
rather than teaching material.
Jan Robbins
I am writing to let you know of
a site by Dust.
This site is not an edu
commissioned or focussed one, but I feel he has created an innovative
approach for getting people to stretch their knowledge of their humble html
doc. This site helped me to see my own learning of html functionality as an
adventure.
It is not easy and I was not a complete beginner when I came across it.
I did it together with someone else who was trying from another machine.
We were sharing our breakthroughs using IRC Chat.
The reason I am posting it is that I found it a fun process
and think that more of this game type approach to learning html
(and learning other technology based vehicles for learning)
could be useful.
I also learned html coding and general use of the internet through
a regular webchat page. Once again learning through a fun social
experience.
MOO MUD type environments are probably one flavour
of techno tool (that I know of) which often seems to be started
with a game facade or learning stage.
These environments are also used for more serious interaction
once people are confident with the functionality.
I am also looking around for my own local wine appreciation
and language centre.!! Sounds great!
Cheers
John Rueter
Just one last piece to this thread:
Regardless of prior experience, people in my studies who rate themselves
as highly confident in their abilities to search always have superior
scores on retrieval variables including efficiency and satisfaction
variables. One study (others found similar results in other studies)
uncovered an interesting dynamic: novices want confirmation (what you
refer to as feedback) even when they already know that their choice of
actions/their decisions is correct. They want the system to say
something like: your search strategy has no errors in it, but systems do
not provide any type of constructive feedback at this time, much less
this type of validation feedback.
Related to this is the finding that after a 2.5 hour hands-on
instructional searching session with a renowned expert in this area (not
I), novices searched on their own for five sessions over a period of a
few weeks, and throughout these sessions asked an average of 1 question
per minute. In the first two sessions the average was 3 questions per
minute about how to proceed in their searches. These systemic information
needs are related to affective variables like confidence because 40% were
simple validation questions. I believe they play a role in stimulating
continuous motivation needed by searchers who are prone to frustration and
discouragement throughout the search process.
I have come to focus on writing learning objectives in what I call
integrated ACS information behavior units (affective/cognitive/sensorimotor)
on the assumption that affective variables always accompany cognitive and
motor behavior and provide a filter for selecting cognitive decisions. Low
confidence and low motivation negatively affect cognitive decisions directly
in searching. In short, I believe that confidence-building is effective in
helping novice searchers develop their skills. If you're interested in this
area, I have some articles on
my web site
Dr. Diane Nahl, Information and Computer Sciences, University of Hawaii
Your answers give me a somewhat better grasp on that difference.
For me part of the puzzle is or was that by "motivation" I usually mean a
decision on how to spend one's time e.g. if coursework is for credit, then
effort, in not then none. And these students do not lack motivation in the
sense of desire for success and willingness to make an effort. So it isn't
obvious to me that confidence is at all a related issue. But some of the
reminders you sent it in fact are making a connection across that gap from
deciding I could do it but don't think it's worth my time, to deciding that
it's not worth my time because I couldn't do it successfully.
The meanings of "confidence" I identify (mainly from the collective
contributions to this discussion here) are:
This is related to an ambiguity in the use of "motivation". If in the context
of crime I see "X had a motive for the crime", it refers to (b): having some
desire for an outcome. If in the context of sport I read that a team wasn't
motivated enough, I also know it is referring to having an insufficient
quantity of (b). But in the literature around self-efficacy, learned
helplessness, and instrinsic motivation if I see "motivation" this does NOT
mean (b) but the net resultant sum of (b) minus (or divided by) (c). I don't
think this is a mistake, but a pointer to a real psychological phenomenon
that, as someone remarked, means that if I have a bad time learning math and
find it difficult, then I will usually experience that as not wanting to learn
math. Nevertheless, it is hard for me to absorb this, since in other areas I
do not experience a lessening of desire just because there are costs: instead
I may decide it is not worth acting, not that it is worthless. (E.g. taking
the time to write messages to ITFORUM, making money, searching for love.) A
rational being would store estimates of benefits (b) and costs (c) separately;
but the Bandura-type literature tells us that people often only store the net
sum. Throwing away information would seem to be silly and likely to be
non-functional. It is also surprising to find it in the area of education,
since education requires effortful learning, and students are usually well
aware of the both rewards and efforts. It seems like a defect in the design
of human minds that they/we should experience difficulty in learning as a
desire not to learn, rather than as a need to make an effort which they would
then decide in each case whether it was worth it.
I think there are further issues here. I suggested that when we measure
motivation or confidence we usually tap into a measure of the resultant of a
learner's internal estimates of costs and benefits, even though a rational
model might keep track of these separately and only combine them at each
decision time. In addition, in education, the costs for a learner are mainly
about the process, while the benefits are mainly about final outcomes
(extrinsic motivation e.g. getting a qualification). That is, perhaps
confidence is about process i.e. a learner's estimate (confidence type (d))
about the efficacy of their study skills in this topic; while motivation type
(b) is about their extrinsic goals. So "motivation" is confounding process
and product too. Also, it is one thing for me to have a model of factors
determining learning, and another for a learner to have their own model and to
make decisions (and answer "motivation" questionnaires) on the basis of that
model. In other words, theories may not be making the right allowances for
the fact that learners are self-governing and must do so on the basis of their
own theories of learning.
I think this is closely related to the discussion Walt Wager began, when he
said surely motivation was just one factor multiplied with others. That is
how I would expect it to work as in a nice physics model; that is what I am
calling "rational" here; and if I were the creator that is how our minds
WOULD work. But I think the SocPsy literature is telling us that real human
minds work differently. (And so Carroll's model must be rational but wrong?)
(And it's also related to my original puzzlement: if students were
rational, surely they would see they were getting it right AND were learning
from basic informational feedback: why did they say their priorities were
different from that? I'm sure Geoff Isaacs was close to the mark in
suggesting that for them, the major issue was the internal decision about
whether this stuff was learnable by them at all. Yet why were they on the
course at all? It seems as teachers there our first task must really be to
convince them they were on the right course ....)
What do you think of this? (Can YOU make sense of it? Is there something
wrong with this analysis?)
So which type of confidence do we wish to instill in our students?
Brian Whitworth
How about: "I believe this to be so based on the documented research
(journal articles, expert interview, etc.) I studied." IMHO, that is the
best type of confidence we can obtain.
Brett Bixler
Most of what I have read about motivation refers to what we do for
individuals and how individuals respond. Is there a social aspect to
confidence and motivation? Maybe our jobs as teachers and instructional
designers is to create a culture that initiates learners into the language
of a particular discipline and introduces them to the way in which that
specialized language represents things they already know and do in their
everyday lives. If learning is a social activity, then doesn't there have
to be some mechanism for creating a culture in which the members of the
group can participate with some degree of confidence that they know the
language, knowledge base, rules, ethics, etc. of the group? Can that kind
of environment overcome other factors that cause learners to feel
unmotivated or inconfident? Can an environment that doesn't provide that
kind of enculturation cause learners to act irrationally?
Terri Buckner
First of all, his summary makes many good points and I was quite impressed
with what he pulled together based on what appears to have been in the
previous discussion. For example, he makes a good point in suggesting that
"confidence" is multidimensional (he uses the word 'ambiguous'). The
multidimensionality of the concept does result in ambiguity when its
meaning in a specific context is not made clear.
Second, in the inferences he draws from the previous messages, he has hit
upon some of the basic elements of expectancy-value theory. This theory
helps explain many aspects of motivation. It postulates that people will be
motivated to the degree that there is an opportunity or goal that they
desire (value) and that they have some level of positive expectancy of
achieving the goal if they exert effort (expectancy). Both the cost and
benefit factors that Steve mentioned are included in this theory, which was
originally developed in England many years ago in the context of philosophy
and economics. Furthermore, costs and benefits do fall into two separate
categories as Steve suggests would be valuable. Costs relate more to
expectancy in terms of how hard will I have to exert myself to achieve my
goal (which makes this one element of a general conception of confidence),
and benefit relates more to values (how much do I really want this goal,
how useful or satisfying will it be to me?).
Each of these concepts can be viewed as subsuming many of the specific
concepts and theories of motivation. For example, the expectancy dimension,
which I call confidence, includes one's belief that effort exerted toward
accomplishing a goal has a reasonable chance of resulting in a successful
performance (attribution theory), and that if my performance is good it
will lead to a desired outcome (locus of control and attribution theory).
This concept of confidence also encompases perceptions of self-efficacy and
some other dimensions. It is also worth noting that failures to learn which
are attributable to the confidence dimension can be due to over-confidence
as well as under-confidence. When people are over-confident, they make the
false assumption that they already know the content or skills, which means
that they do not perceive themselves as having gaps, and they do not make
an effort to learn — at least not until they discover that they do,
indeed, have a gap. Over-confidence is not the same as high-confidence wherein
learners correctly assume that they already know or can learn the material.
The value dimension, which I call "relevance", relates to the perceived
benefits of a given opportunity or goal. The benefits can be in terms of
utility (how useful this learning experience is to me now or will be in the
future) or one or more of several other factors. For example, when the
structure of learning activities and instructional content are appealing to
a person's personal interests or learning style, they will often be
motivated even if there is no extrinsic utilitarian benefit. For example,
people who are high in need for achievement tend to enjoy having a high
degree of control over their studies and how they prepare their
assignements. Unless there is a necessity for it (such as, "I don't really
want to do this anyway, and if I am in a group, maybe it will be easier and
quicker"), they tend not to enjoy collaborative learning assignements. When
their performance is being graded, they prefer to work alone and will be
motivated by that type of learning condition. The concept of authenticity
in the constructivist literature is another important dimension of
relevance. Either actual relevance to a "real world" setting, or a
simulated and/or vicarious relationship as in some highly motivating
micro-world activities contributes to the motivation to learn.
One of Steve's dimensions of confidence, "b) Strength of desire to achieve
knowledge of a topic", is more of a dimension of relevance, or value, than
of confidence.
It is generally assumed that the relationship between value and expectancy,
or in current terms, relevance and confidence, is multiplicative. That is,
if either term goes to zero, a person will not be motivated. This helps
explain why neither confidence nor relevance can be considered to be the
most important element of motivation, although various writers have
championed one over the other. One can be highly confident of success in a
given area, but if that area has absolutely no value (intrinsic or
extrinsic) to the person, then the person will not be motivated by that
goal or activity. A similar situation exists with regard to relevance.
Another point to be made in regard to motivation is that relevance and
confidence do not subsume all of its important elements. There is also
curiosity, or attention, which is related to relevance, but has some
distinguishing properties. Attention producing activities are best
explained by arousal theory and the literatures on curiosity and boredom.
Attention, or curiosity at some level, is prerequisite to the other
elements of motivation. Also, attention as a motivational factor is
distinguished from attention in the learning literature. Simply stated, the
motivational concern is for getting and sustaining learners' attention. The
learning concern is for directing attention to the appropriate cues,
prompts, or other aspects of a learning environment.
Still another major area of motivation factors concerns outcomes. Both a
learner's expectations about what will happen as a consequence of trying to
learn and perform, and what actually does happen will influence a learner's
continuing motivaton. It includes aspects of what Steve listed under point
"a)" in his listing. This dimension of motivation includes the use of
reinforcement contingencies and feedback combined with the learner's
cognitive evaluation of outcomes based on perceived dissonances or
congruities with expectations. These result from the learner's reflective
evaluations and perceptions of equity. The equity perceptions are another
place where cost/benefit perceptions are incorporated. The learner's
feelings of satisfaction with a learning experience will depend in part on
whether he/she feels that what he got was worth the effort (cost in terms
of blood, sweat, tears, and cash). If a learer feels that he/she learned
something interesting and/or useful (depending on what the learner's goals
were at the beginning), that they have mastered it sufficiently relative to
their goals, and that the results were worth the effort, then there will be
a positive effect on continuing motivation.
All of these elements of motivation can be combined, not in an ecletic,
piecemeal manner, but in an holistic and inclusive manner. By taking a
systems perspective of the motivational, learning, and performance
behaviors of a student over time and including both internal psychological
factors and environmental factors (social influence, availability of
appropriate information and resources, feedback, etc.), one can include all
of these theories within the context of those aspects of behavior that they
are best able to explain. Together, they can contribute to an holistic
understanding and lead to clearer, more testable conceptions of the
elements of motivation.
This has been a long message in which I have tried to summarize a few of
the things that I have learned about motivation and that form the basis of
what I have published as the ARCS model. It includes the four dimensions
listed above which are incorporated in the acronym "ARCS" (Attention,
Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction). I welcome reactions, and if
anyone wants references to articles that talk about some of these things, I
will be glad to provide them.
John M. Keller
Keller, J.M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth
(ed.) Instructional Theories and Models: An Overview of Their Current
Status. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, pp.383-434.
Keller, J.M. (1984). The use of the ARCS model of motivation in teacher
training. In Shaw, K., & Trott, A.J. (Eds.). Aspects of Educational
Technology, Volume XVII. London: Kogan Page, pp. 140-145.
Keller, J.M. (1987). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn.
Performance & Instruction, 26 (8), 1-7.
Keller, J.M. (1987). The systematic process of motivational design.
Performance & Instruction, 26 (9), 1-8.
Keller, J.M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of motivational
design. Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2-10.
Keller, J.M., & Kopp, T.W. (1987). Application of the ARCS model to
motivational design. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional Theories in
Action: Lessons Illustrating Selected Theories. New York: Lawrence
Erlbaum, Publishers, 289-320.
Keller, J.M., & Suzuki, K. (1988). Application of the ARCS model to
courseware design. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Instructional Designs for
Microcomputer Courseware. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum, Publisher,
pp.401-434.
Keller, J.M., & Keller, B.H. (1991). Motivating learners with multimedia
instruction. Proceedings of the International Conference on Multi-Media in
Education and Training (ICOMMET '91). Tokyo, Japan: The Japanese
Association for Educational Technology and the International Society for
Technology in Education.
Keller, J.M. (1992) Enhancing the motivation to learn: Origins and
applications of the ARCS model.
Reports from the Institute of Education
(Sendai, Japan: Institute of Education, Tohoku Gakuin University),
11 pp.45-67.
Keller, J.M., & Burkman, E. (1993). Motivation. In M. Fleming (Ed.),
Instructional Message Design, 2nd Edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Educational Technology Press.
Astleitner, H., & Keller, J. (1995). A model of motivationally adaptive
computer-assisted instruction, Journal of Research on Computing in
Education, 27 (3), 270-281.
Keller, J.M. (1996). Motivational design and multimedia: Beyond the novelty
effect. Proceedings of the International Symposium on New Technologies of
Instruction, 1966. Taipei: Taiwan: National Taiwan Teacher's College. (This
document is available in English and Chinese.)
Keller, J.M. (1994). Trends and tactics for employee motivation,
HR Horizons, 115 (Winter 94), 5-10.
Vallerand, R.J. & Bissonnette, R. (1992). Intrinsic, extrinsic and
amotivational styles as predictors of behavior: A
prospective study. Journal of Personality (60), (3), 599-620.
Vallerand, R.J., Pelletier, L.G., Blais, M.R., Briere, N.M., Senecal, C., &
Vallieres, E.F. (1992). The Academic Motivation Scale: A measure of intrinsic,
extrinsic, and amotivation in education,
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 1003-1017.
Vallerand, R.J., Pelletier, L.G., Blais, M.R., Briere, N.M., Senecal, C., &
Vallieres, E.F. (1993). On the assessment of intrinsic, extrinsic, and
amotivation in education: Evidence on the concurrent and construct validity
of the Academic Motivation Scale. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 53, 159-173.
Bev Taylor's Bibliography on motivation and learning
Other
IMO:
It has been my experience that students who have learned about studenting via
a system that relies heavily on rewards and punishments feel most comfortable
in that kind of situation, and have "forgotten" — or never learned
— how to rely on their own inner standards as to a) their own objectives
for the course and consequently of course, b) how to know whether what they're
doing is any "good" or not. Depending on your own objectives for the course,
you might want additionally to include teaching them, or guiding them in
re-learning, how to self-assess...
TAFE NSW, Australia
Study Skills Centre, The Australian National University, Canberra, AUSTRALIA
Hypertext
I have enjoyed this discussion very much. I am particularly interested
in the question of whether hypertext course materials contribute to
student confidence (of self efficacy) because they are interactive,
self-paced and self-accessed. Or perhaps hypertext (which is not linear)
confuses learners who are not already confident with that medium.
Study Skills Centre, The Australian National University, Canberra, AUSTRALIA
Janet Reid
Educational Designer Open Learning Institute,
Wagga Wagga Campus, Charles Sturt University, Australia
Affective learning objectives
I wouldn't abandon the other objectives for your course but you might add
objectives in the affective domains, which include self-confidence and
motivation.
Assistant Dean, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences
Professor, Department of Biology
Portland State University, Portland, Oregon 97207-0751
I teach people to search databases in libraries and on the net (search
engines). Information retrieval has become very complex since we got rid
of card catalogs. Much of my research has been with novices learning to
use information technology to retrieve information for various purposes.
I have focused on affective variables like confidence and self-efficacy
(à la Bandura) and have found that in this context they are significant.
Steve's first reply
The question for me came from a context of students learning how to program
computers on a conversion MSc course, where a) there is a big range of prior
ability, so I see many students who don't need any confidence boosting, but
also many that do. b) programming gives the intrinsic feedback of whether
the program runs which seems to me (from of course a perspective of
confidence) to be enough.
Steve's second response:
I think that "confidence" has multiple meanings in this area, which I hadn't
at all understood before. However it is not clear to me whether this is:
Ambiguities in 'confidence' and 'motivation'
More from itforum
Three more types of confidence
I have just completed my PhD on generating agreement in electronic
groups. Here is a penny's worth from that. The review I have done
suggests there are three types of confidence:
Dept of Information Systems, Manukau Institute of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
bwhtwrth@manukau.ac.nz
The Jack P. Royer Center for Learning and Academic Technologies (C-LAT)
Univ. Pk., PA 16802
tbuckner@blue.cc.odu.edu
John Keller and the ARCS model
I just joined the Forum, so I have not read all the background notes that
led to Steve Draper's summary titled "Ambiguities in 'confidence' and
'motivation'", although David Nelson and Walt Wager brought some of the
points to my attention. Without going back to read all of that material,
there are several points I would like to make in regard to Steve's summary,
and I realize that some of my points may have been discussed previously.
Florida State University, jkeller@mailer.fsu.edu
Keller's References around ARCS
References pertaining to learning motivation:
Keller, J.M. (1979). Motivation and instructional design: A theoretical
perspective. Journal of Instructional Development, 2(4), 26-34.References pertaining to workplace motivation
Keller, J.M. (1992). Motivational Systems. In H. Stolovitch, & E. Keeps
(Eds), Handbook of Human Performance Technology. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.General References
Dweck, C.S. (1986) "Motivational processes affecting learning"
American Psychologist vol.41 no.10 pp.1040-1048