Situating Self-Learning Video Materials within the Paradigm of the ARCS Model: A Hands-on Experience

Abstract

The ARCS Model of learner motivation looks into the various parameters that foster learning. In this paper, I strive to show how a proper implementation of this model and its various pedagogical ramifications can be profitably applied while shooting video SLMs or self-learning materials for ODL/OL learners. I argue that the strategies inherent in the making of video self-learning materials can be embedded within the conceptual grid of the said model. This is based on a real, hands-on experience while shooting videos for an English undergraduate course for ODL/OL learners. Any topic for the learners had three videos—a trailer that was a quick introduction to the subject matter, a slightly longer video that enumerated the sub-topics within the topic, and the main video that explained the subject matter in greater detail, with the inclusion of power point. It was increasingly felt that such a tri-partite division would foster greater learner participation and involvement instead of a single, long video that is likely to disrupt learner participation in this teaching-learning paradigm. Thus, the ARCS Model’s applicability is extended to the realm of video SLMs that are likely to result in the percolation of the target subject matter deep within the learners.

1. Introduction

The ARCS Model of learner motivation, pioneered by John Keller in 1979, relies on the four foundational elements cardinal to learner motivation—attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction. John Keller formulated this idea with the aim in view that a proper synthesis of the four elements can alone result in learner motivation and desired outcomes, if learning takes place within this positivist paradigm of expected returns and value addition. Keller was of the firm view that the previous behaviorist theories were more concerned with external stimuli and paid scant attention to learner motivation and its various ramifications. Though the effectiveness of the said model has been time and again demonstrated with recourse to learner motivation of learners in ODL/OL modes ([1], p. 194; [2], p. 38; [3], p. 97; [4], p. 707). The application of this model in various branches of knowledge, especially in ODL modes of education employing open systems and instructional technologies, has been a nodal point of investigation (Figure 1) [5].

Figure 1.

The ARCS model of learner motivation. Image courtesy: https://educationlibrary.org/model-of-motivation-arcs-instructional-design/

As S. Kurt [6] puts it succinctly in his article entitled “Model of Motivation: ARCS Instructional Design”:

With the rise of online learning, there has been renewed interest in John Keller’s Instructional Model of Motivation. It is much more challenging to motivate students online than it is in class. Keller’s model offers ways to keep students on task throughout online instruction. It is based on expectancy-theory, which—assumes that people are motivated to engage in an activity if it is perceived to be linked to the satisfaction of personal needs (the value aspect) and if there is a positive expectancy for success (the expectancy aspect).

2. Background and motivation

The author of the paper has been teaching in a certain dual mode, UGC-recognized university in India. A dual-mode university is an institution of higher learning in India where students can pursue their degrees both through conventional and regular mode/s and the online and distance modes of instruction. As part of his daily activities at the CDOE, or Centre for Distance & Online Education, he is supposed to prepare SLMs or self-learning materials for the online and distance education students. In course of time, there was a need to prepare and shoot videos for instructional efficacy in line with online learning platforms like the MOOCs—SWAYAM, Unacademy, Course Era are some of the cases in point that employ online videos that explain a topic clearly and that seek to engage the learner with a more pronounced trajectory. A video room was made available where the videos were shot. To make the topic more accessible to the learner, the video related to a particular topic was decided to be divided into three distinguishable parts: (i) a two-minute video that opened the topic with an interesting anecdote or story, coupled with the quick introduction of the presenter, (ii) a six-minute video that explained the topic in some detail with the relevance of the topic for the online learner, and (iii) a twenty- or thirty-minute video that explained the topic in detail with the accompaniment of a power point presentation.

This three-level, tri-partite division looked germane to the educational motivation model proposed by the American educational reformer and psychologist, John Keller (1938) who proposed the ARCS Model of learner motivation wherein he postulated the idea that external stimulus is more vital and is often conducive to learning when the appropriate learning environment is created. Keller was more concerned about the external factors that motivated the learner, and was less concerned about what happened inside the learner, much in the lines of Skinner who was keen to measure and determine external stimulus through his novel experiments with pigeons. The ARCS Model of learner motivation is firmly based on the behaviorist models that went before him that emphasize on repetitive, positive reinforcements that foster the learning process. However, the recent upgrade to this model pays attention to some of the hitherto neglected theories that lay special emphasis on “emotions and intrinsic motivators as drivers” (Waggindton and Dell Arcs Motivation and Distance Learning). Also, there look some problems in the application of the said model for learners who are already motivated and are not in special need for extra dose of motivation. Also, the theory looks to be heavily influenced by the idea and constructs of volition as a motivational construct, popularized by Kuhl. Here, “positive reinforcements” lead to pronounced learning patterns, especially in the third phase of the theory called “Confidence.” It is only when positive and salubrious learning situations are created when a positive learning pattern emerges. The said model was extensively field tested and then applied to a wide range of educational stakeholders.

The author, in light of the above background, was motivated to see how the video self-learning materials and this tri-partite division for better instructional efficacy could be situated within the conceptual grid of the model proposed by Keller. As a department that aspires to achieve the status of a full-fledged wing of research and support, much in lines with the credo of the university, the author thought it incumbent to look at such instructional strategies within a theoretical background in online and distance education.

3. The research gap

Previous research in online instruction and the use of motivational videos are mostly concerned about the efficacy of these in context of online learning and learning theories. There exists sufficient literature with respect to the ARCS Model and its dexterous application in online and distance teaching, especially with regard to non-completion of courses [1], learning independence in elementary education [7], motivation [8], and application in courses per se and the results obtained thereof [9, 10], and little research has been conducted on how the said model can be studied within the conceptual grid of self-learning video materials and content. These studies take into account the myriad ways in which the famed instructional model by Keller proposed in the 1980s find numerous applications in different areas of flipped and blended learning, especially in areas of instructional pedagogy and praxis, but literature is relatively scarce when it comes to the application of the model in developing online, especially video content. There is no denying the fact that the model has been tested by other researchers and found applicable and relevant in a number of instances, but the biggest application of the same is in the way it has been applied to instructional motivation and how it can elicit learner autonomy and participation. However, a substantial learning content is online now and especially in the form of online videos, and the matter to what extent such videos can elicit learner motivation is a matter of debate. Making video content for the sake of content will be ultimately self-defeating, and it remains a matter of open debate so as to what should be and not be the stuff of video self-learning materials that aid learner growth and autonomy. One of the increasing and pronounced strains in the application of the ARCS Model is to fish out the areas that aid learner empowerment and this paper looks to fill the gap with recourse to the development of electronic content and situating it within the conceptual grid of the said model.

4. The methodology and conceptual grid

It is rather difficult to ascertain any one methodology or theory that can be used in distance and online education. The reasons range from the diversity of mechanisms used to elicit learner participation to that of the competing ideologues at work see to it that the best theory of learner motivation is at work. A methodology is a sustained application of any theory and how the theory explains and shapes the resultant discourse of the theory. Online, flipped, and blended learning styles all have their own methodologies and learning styles, and owing to the plethora of techniques, any one single, monolithic theory and the use of the same are rather difficult. The noted online teaching expert and theorist, Terry Anderson has opined that it is rather difficult and cumbersome to build an over-arching theory of online education:

As noted, Terry Anderson (2011) examined the possibility of building a theory of online education, starting with the assumption that it would be a difficult, and perhaps impossible, task. He approached this undertaking from a distance education perspective, having spent much of his career at Athabasca University, the major higher education distance education provider in Canada. While he acknowledged that many theorists and practitioners consider online learning as “a subset of learning in general” […] he also stated: online learning as a subset of distance education has always been concerned with provision of access to educational experience that is, at least more flexible in time and in space as campus-based education (in [11], p. 176).

Anderson focused on a number of well-respected theorists here, including Bransford et al. (1999), who posited the idea that learning is dependent on the four parameters of community centeredness, learner centeredness, knowledge centeredness, and assessment centeredness. Anderson was more interested with the connections, rather vital connections that are made between peers, the learner, and the teacher (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Courtesy: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351983909_A_Case_Study_of_ESL_Students%27_Remote_Speaking_Class_Learning_Experiences_in_a_Canada_University_During_the_COVID-19_Pandemic/figures?lo=1 courtesy: Min Huang.

What can be easily understood from the picture above is the way learning in the online mode is an interconnected whole. True that many educational theories do well document the importance of this interconnectedness, called constructivism, but Anderson’s Model takes into account the four factors of the centeredness that is so vital on online learning. The given model pays due regard to the resources at work, the mode of study in the online sphere (synchronous or asynchronous), the general environment per se, meaning the community of the learning tools at the disposal of the learner, and the myriad ways in which the learner can participate in the entire teaching-learning process.

Further applications of Anderson’s method can be situated within what is called the Activity Theory of learning, which also takes from educational psychologists like Lev Vygotsky. AT is an eclectic theory that finds its numerous applications in social sciences and other applications in learning as a cardinal point of emphasis. It has its genesis in the Soviet psychological activity theory popularized by Sergei Rubenstein in the 1930s. Activity Theory goes beyond the traditional reflexology and classical conditioning, the latter proposed and developed by Pavlov and Skinner. It is a systemic approach that tends to look at an entire unit as a mode of analysis rather than its constituent parts. More of a meta-theory than something else, it pays attention to the gamut of experiences that a human being may have while situated within a social setting. It pays due regard to factors such as environment, personal history and other associated factors, motivations, and the immense complexity of real-life situations. According to the ethnographer Bonnie Nardi, AT is more concerned with the unity of consciousness and activity. Very effective in studying case studies and ethnographic studies, Activity Theory looks at the issues just mentioned with a qualitative lens. At the end of 1990s, there were further improvements and hence emerged yet another variant of AT, now called SSAT or systemic structural activity theory. The development of SSAT has been specifically oriented toward the analysis and design of the basic elements of human work activity: tasks, tools, methods, objects and results, and the skills, experience, and abilities of involved subjects.

5. Applications of the methodology and relevance to the ARCS Model

While a theory helps explain complex phenomenon and bind concepts, methodology may be seen as a concrete application of that theory and how it can be put to best use in a real-world setting. The ARCS Model of Attention, Relevance, Confidence and Satisfaction look at increasing learner autonomy and participation, and this means that the learner in an online setting is firmly placed within the grid of the teaching-learning paradigm. S/he is presented the topic in ways that will percolate deep within and this is achieved in a systemic process where materials are presented in ways that will ensure optimal learning. Anderson’s aim to bind various aspects of online learning, no matter, however, difficult that might be and Activity Theory reinforce the idea of online activity and how the same is presented to the learner in piecemeal initially, and then explained in ways that ensures the attention of the learner in question brings home the idea of motivation and the overall environment that is two of the many parameters that AT looks into. SAAT and its application in the hands-on experience bring home the idea of how the latent skills, motivation levels and tasks, tools, methods, and objects coalesce to bring about the various parameters that need to be combined or taken into account together to elicit learner participation. While the paper involves the ARCS Model as a theoretical tool to bring forth its main idea of learner participation through the use of video SLMs, it also employs many facets of Activity Theory and the multifarious ways in which the latter takes into consideration the total learning “environment” at work to elicit learner participation. While breaking a topic into its constituent parts in form of the tri-partite division, the paper also looks into ways in which this methodology involves both the learner and the instructor positioned within the online environment in a fruitful, symbiotic relationship of the learning environment. AT pays attention to the fact that a learner is situated within a learning paradigm—within a social and semiotic matrix that employs the instructional design, learning objectives, and outcomes, the world of the hyperlink and above all, the discourse of mutual understanding and learner participation. Since AT is more concerned with the “gamut of experiences” that a learner may have while situated within a social setting, it is imperative that the application of the ARCS Model and its aim to elicit learner autonomy and support is quite in line with this methodology of AT, but this also means that this idea of video self-learning materials and the strategies employed to gain learner attention and independence do employ AT as a methodology and Keller’s model as a theoretical tool of analysis.

6. The ARCS Model: further discussions

Each element within this model can be broken down into three sub-units that constitute the four main elements. For example, the first element, that is, attention can be sub-divided as comprising three sub-elements:

1. The perceptual arousal of the students must be an event occurring within the learning process.

2. This is followed by the inquiry arousal where the online instructor asks a few questions that pique learner interest further.

3. This is concluded by what is called—variability—the instructor takes recourse to various multimedia to prove a point and later sub-divide the students to work in groups.

This can be repeated with the other remaining three elements. For example, the second element relevance may comprise of sub-units like (a). goal orientation, (b). motive matching, and (c). familiarity.

Whatever be the thrust of investigation, the focus has been on learner motivation and how instructional design can help foster this. Since any ODL mode of instruction relies on technology-mediated learning, it is important to keep in mind its various ramifications vis-à-vis the methods “that go into it and how this mode of instruction relies on a teacher-student symbiosis in acquiring various ways to provide instruction”:

There is no one method for providing ODL, so a wide variety of courses are described as open learning “oras‗distance learning” […]. The variety is instructive. In some cases, students work almost entirely by themselves (e.g., correspondence courses); in others, they study in groups (e.g., interactive radio); and in still others they might meet together at intervals (e.g., distance teacher training). There is an equally wide variety of purposes to which ODL is put, ranging from primary education to post-school study of the secondary curriculum and, ultimately, professional updating [12].

India has a diversified population and the need of the hour is to increase the skilled task force of the nation. Since the arrival of the present government at the Centre, the same has stressed more importance on the concept of a new nation that will not be divided along digital lines. This is to say that there has been a resurgence of technology-mediated learning and the spurt of new e-platforms of learning like Udemy, Unacademy. e-Skill India, SWAYAM, and others. The emphasis is on the concept of technology and learning for all. These platforms emphasize on the deft use of videos for effective learning. True that technology best leads to learning and its resources should be used wisely [13], these platforms provide materials to the students through the use of videos that are readily comprehensible to the students. As it can be well-understood, videos are indispensable when learning has to be more effective ([14], p. 1061) and the use of such videos leads to greater learner participation ([15], p. 323). For example, the SWAYAM program launched by the AICTE or All India Council of Technical Education, New Delhi, there is an increasing use of videos to elicit learner participation and this has led to the immense popularity of the said project to strengthen the skill building capacity of the learners. It is not only the digital literacy that the nation needs, for mere use of technology might be self-defeating if that does not lead to the achievement of quality outcomes, and may lead to—digital divides (UNCTAD—Foreword, [16]). Similarly, other e-platforms of learning like the Course era that has virtually every kind of program available at its disposal to further learner participation, there is an increasing use of videos to help achieve the avowed objectives of the said program as well (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

A typical course era environment on YouTube. Courtesy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L2nRsMczLY

Online learning platforms like these use the aid of videos to elicit learner participation.

7. Aims and objectives

The paper looks forward to achieve the following objectives:

1. It seeks to situate the video self-learning materials within the paradigm of the ARCS Model as popularized by Keller and investigates how the same can be explained and further explored with recourse to Activity Theory that looks forward to integrate the cognitive level with the perceptual level in real world settings. It looks forward to situate the video SLMs in line with this methodology and the theory of learner participation and motivation that takes a more pronounced trajectory with recourse to learning experiences and attitudinal predilections vis-à-vis content.

2. It looks at the gradual progression of the 2-minute, 6-minute, and 20-minute videos and looks into the practical application of the said model to buttress the idea that the fragmentation of a long video is feasible into smaller parts or micro-units, as they are expected to percolate better into the learners to ensure better learner participation.

The paper is a real, hands-on experience on the issue of the preparation of video self-learning materials for an undergraduate course in a certain university in India in the Centre for Distance and Online Education. The video content developer was entrusted with the job of preparing a series of video lectures for a paper on English language and comprehension called Integrated Professional English. It is a university course and all the students in humanities and engineering disciplines had to take the paper to pass successfully in the said paper. The syllabus of the paper was divided into four COs or competencies and each had components as diverse as elementary grammar and composition, workplace documentation and communication, formal communication and etiquette and external, coupled with internal communication in the professional sphere. The paper seeks to evaluate the 4 ‗integrated skills of LSRW, viz., listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Thus, components are divided for each skill in a particular CO or module in order to hone all four skills in a learner. Since the said CDOE was engaged in making SLMs or self-learning materials in the shape of tangible reading materials, it also carried on the novel idea of walking a bit an extra mile and preparing content for videos with the help of a dedicated fleet of content designers. Initially conceived as a single, long video, it was later decided to split it into three parts as follows:

1. PHASE I: A 2-minute video that introduces the course and the instructor, often starting with an interesting anecdote to pique learner interest. The video begins with an interesting anecdote or story and tries to hook the learner’s interest by analyzing the subject matter firmly in the discourse of practical applicability of the topic in a real-world setting.

2. PHASE II: A 6-minute video that builds upon the previous 2-minute video and that explains the course in greater detail, situates it within the conceptual grid of relevance within the ARCS Model. Students are told why they need to watch the video and what they can expect to gain from this. This phase relies on two vital parameters within the ARCS Model—relevance and attention. By situating this part of the video within the said parameters of relevance and attention, learner motivation gains an upward trajectory and the student is riveted to the video. This second phase of the video gives credence to the idea that learner motivation can be increased if these parameters are given adequate attention. This part of the video might also be seen to be the phase where a form application of the AT is seen—online learners are made to be part of an entire community of learners-teachers along with an entire array of complex, embedded networks, that includes the online platform, the discourse centering on learning, realia, the world wide web, the schemata of the learner that is set into motion and how it is set to be replaced by new knowledge. This phase also prepares the learner as well as the teacher on the deft “negotiation” of meaning—there is no one, “correct” way to learn and thus, it becomes incumbent on the part of both the parties to settle on the most appropriate way to negotiate meaning and the aim of the topic to engage the learner in meaningful settings. This phase is vital as without this, the potential learner will not be in a position to move meaningfully to the third phase.

3. PHASE III: In this particular phase, attention is given to a long, 25–30-minute video where the instructor talks about the main matter of attention, or in simple words, the main topic under consideration. Since the two earlier phases have already been covered, this particular phase takes into account the fact that learner attention and relevance of the subject matter have already been achieved. In this phase, the two other remaining parameters are expected to be achieved—that of confidence and satisfaction. Since the learner has been already exposed to a positive learning environment since the beginning, it is expected that s/he would be more attuned to assimilating the subject matter with positive outcomes. This phase is a summation of the earlier two phases wherein more attention was given to inducing the leaner to accept the initial learning environment. It had more to do with the positive stimulus during the learning plan than the plan per se. The two phases look into various ways in which the online learner as well as the instructor is firmly situated within the paradigm of Activity Theory—how various modes of apprehending reality and the integration of skills are achieved. The skills here are those of attention and relevance gathering—the multifarious ways in which the learner understands the subject matter as a sunset of the larger world viewed through the lens of the various cognitive constructs and negotiating parameters.

This model of learner motivation was applied to a course called Integrated Professional English, a compulsory paper that was offered as a university course to the combined students of BBA, BCA, B.Com and other allied streams. The paper contained elements of grammar, composition, communicative competence in formal contexts, that is, in a professional setup. Other allied areas that were open for investigation were documentation and its various ramifications in a formal context as well. As it has been well pointed out by language experts, a knowledge of elementary grammar is necessary for communicative competence (American English “Teachers Corner” [17]), but it has also been observed that students shy away when they are confronted with the dry and unappealing rules of the internalized system of a language system that grammar represents. Since the first module of the syllabus dealt with grammar, it was deemed more important by the course instructor to resort to this model of learner motivation to look into the possible strategies to help the student assimilate the contents of the course (Figure 4).

Figure 4.

The 2-minute introductory video. Photo courtesy: Centre for Distance and Online Education, KLEF University. (All the videos stills are courtesy of the Centre for Distance and Online Education, KLEF Deemed to be University, Vaddeshwaram, Andhra Pradesh State; India. Special thanks to the esteemed Director for giving permission to use these stills for the purposes of the paper. Copyright KLCDOE Studio, 2023.)

In this part of the video, the following steps were taken to pique learner interest and participation:

1. The course instructor welcomed the students and started the lesson with an anecdote or a useful story that highlights the importance of grammar and punctuation. The example that was taken into consideration is the following sentence:¹

“Woman! Without her, man is nothing. “Woman, without her man, is nothing.”

It was stressed that with a subtle play of the punctuation marks, the entire meaning of the sentence changed. Many other examples were supplied to hook the learner’s attention, well in keeping with the ARCS Model of motivation. The section also saw the course instructor introducing himself with a smile trying to connect with the online learners then and there (Figure 5).

Figure 5.

The 6-minute extension video. Photo courtesy: Ibid.

In this particular video, which can be seen as a spontaneous extension of the previous, 2-minute video, the instructor welcomed the learners and made a slight reference to the previous video where the topic was introduced. The instructor begins with an elaborate mention of the topics within the module/unit and progresses with the enumeration of them. The video also gives them some idea about the wider implications and applicability of the topic and what are its various applications in the job market. This section talks about the various forms that documentation can assume in a professional setting (Figure 6).

Figure 6.

The 20-minute main video. Photo courtesy: Ibid.

This main video may be seen as a natural extension of the previous two videos. Here, the course instructor, after having prepared the necessary ground for learner motivation, proceeds to acquaint the learners with the main topic within the particular module. The power point associated with the topic was flashed on the screen and the instructor summed up the major ideas within a particular slide. This is the longest part within the entire spectrum of three videos. Had not the instructor not taken care of appending the two earlier videos, this entire section would have looked uninteresting and dull to an online learner.

After having taken stock of all the three stages in a particular topic with recourse to the ARCS Model, the online learner is expected to have absorbed the topic in consideration and would have been exposed to all the four levels: attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction. The first two videos are supposed to cover the first two parameters, viz., attention and relevance. The learners are first exposed to a positive learning environment where the smiling subject expert or counselor welcomes the online learner and starts discussing the topic by giving some real-life examples that are relevant to the learner. In the next stage, the learner is given an idea about the topic in detail and in what can be called—micro-units; each sub-topic is presented within a slide in a particular power point presentation.

8. Further discussions and future applications

The above-mentioned hands-on experience asks many questions. To what extent is such a tri-partite division of a subject or topic of discussion feasible? Though it was applied to a group of undergraduate students who had an English component as a compulsory paper, but does the application of Keller’s model indeed elicit positive responses—for instance, what happens to a learner who is already motivated and may find this approach to learning redundant?

9. Conclusion

The ARCS Model is a motivational model that looks into the factors that facilitate the teaching-learning process. This paper has presented a real, hands-on experience conducted with recourse to a paper of English language meant for undergraduate online learners. The paper has tried to show how the idea of making videos for online learners in an online setting can be situated and firmly embedded within the paradigm of the ARCS Model as propounded by Keller.

Declaration

This is to declare that the author received no funding for the purposes of this essay. A modest funding will be available from the said university in case the article is indexed in Web of Science database, as InTech Open papers normally aim for.