Research Question Answers
|
Research question |
Answer |
Evidence |
|
How does using Keller’s ARCS model of motivation as a framework for team meetings affect the reading motivation of students on McConnell’s Readers Rally team? |
Using the ARCS model had a positive effect on the reading motivation dimensions of Challenge, Recognition, and Competition.
It also had a positive effect had on students’ self-reported reading motivation.
Using the ARCS model helped create an atmosphere that motivated students enough to want to repeat the program. |
Difference in average from pre to post MRQs for the following dimensions: Challenge .10 Recognition .14 Competition .17
Fifty percent of the students who completed reflections stated that their reading habits had changed.
Ninety-three percent of the students who completed reflections said they will participate in Readers Rally next year. |
Discussion
Overall, the results of the post-survey MRQ are not greatly different from the pre-survey MRQ, and while many dimensions showed positive change, some showed a negative effect. On the face of it this would seem to suggest that the ARCS strategies had little impact on reading motivation, but it is possible that these results are due to the already high averages for the dimensions on the pre-surveys. Seven of the nine dimensions showed an average of 3.20 or above (on a scale of 1 to 4) on the pre-survey. It would stand to reason that students who participate in a voluntary before-school activity that involves reading books outside of school would already be highly motivated readers. The negative effects may be due to the fact that when the students took the pre-survey, it was only the second meeting of the group. At that time, many of the students did not know each other, and most were probably anxious to please the faculty advisors, since they were aware that not all of the participants would actually get to attend the county competition. Even though I told the students that the survey was merely to see what types of activities they would enjoy most in the Readers Rally meetings, it is possible that some felt that it would be to their advantage to give higher ratings on the survey. When the post-survey was completed, the students had bonded as a group and were quite social. In addition, the students who were going to represent the school at the county competition had already been chosen. Thus, the atmosphere in the room when the students filled out the post-survey was much more relaxed, and the students may have been more apt to answer honestly. In my opinion, these factors help explain the small, and in some cases negative, changes in the motivation dimension averages.
The comparison that most directly relates to the effects of the ARCS strategies is the comparison of the pre-survey averages of the active members to their post-survey averages, since these were the students who were exposed to the ARCS strategies over the course of the program. None of the changes were statistically significant, but the dimensions that showed the most positive change were Competition (associated with the ARCS component Relevance), Recognition (associated with Satisfaction), and Challenge (associated with Confidence). The fact that these dimensions span three of the four ARCS components suggests that the ARCS strategies were fairly equal in their impact. Also, the nature of the Readers Rally program itself probably played a role. Readers Rally is at its heart a competition, and recognition of the achievement of the team members is a natural part of the program. While a few of the books on the list are easy reads, most of the books are more challenging, and the prospect of trying to read as many of the books from a list of twenty as possible in a time period of a few months presents a challenge in itself. Thus, the nature of the program lent itself to changes in these dimensions. Interestingly, the dimension that showed the most negative effect was the Social dimension (associated with Relevance). This might seem odd, given that Readers Rally affords students the opportunity to take what is usually a solitary activity (reading), and add the social component of discussing books. One possible explanation lies in the specific questions used to determine the Social dimension score. Two of the questions refer to family: “I visit the library often with my family” and “I like to tell my family about what I am reading.” One question refers to parents: “I sometimes read to my parents,” and one question refers to siblings, “I often read to my brother or sister.” Three of the seven questions refer to friends. Given that the social world of middle school students revolves around friends, and not family, the negative change in the average for the social dimension may be a result of the team members being more honest in their answers on the post-test than the pre-test, as discussed earlier.
When comparing the pre-survey results to the post-survey results for all completed surveys (26 pre-surveys and 18 post-surveys), the change in the average for the Compliance (associated with Relevance) dimension was statistically significant. Since only active members completed the post-survey, this change would seem to suggest that active members are more compliant, or possibly became more compliant, than those who did not remain with the program. That the active group was already more compliant would seem to be born out by the comparison of the pre-survey averages of active members to the pre-survey averages of inactive members. When comparing these two groups (active vs. inactive), two dimensions were statistically significant, Compliance and Importance. This higher level for Compliance for the active members seems logical, since part of the motivation for staying active might be a disinclination to disappoint parents or the Readers Rally advisors by dropping out. Also, the statistically different change in the Importance dimension (associated with Relevance) would suggest that from the outset, reading was more important to those students who remained with the program than to those who lost interest.
Thus, the results of the pre and post MRQs seem to suggest that while ARCS strategies may have had some effect on reading motivation, the students who volunteered to become a part of Readers Rally were already highly motivated, and those who remained active in the program were more motivated in the areas of Compliance and Importance than those who dropped out of the program.
The results shown by the student reflection are more dramatic. Fifty percent of the fourteen students who completed the survey stated that their reading habits had changed as a result of Readers Rally. When the two students who answered with a qualified no (“no, but I read more variety,” and “no, but I pace myself more,”) are included, the percentage rises to 64%. Thus, more than half of the participants self-report a change in their reading motivation.
When asked if they would participate in Readers Rally again next year, 93% stated that yes, they would participate. A possible interpretation of this finding is that using the ARCS strategies helped make the Readers Rally program interesting, relevant, and rewarding enough that students want to participate again next year.
When asked what their favorite activity was, 21 of the 22 answers (students could name more than one activity) were activities that involved competition. Interestingly though, when asked what their least favorite activity was, the answer which was mentioned five times was also a competition activity (the snowman game)—one that had been mentioned three times as a favorite. This would seem to suggest that students have personal preferences for types of competition or games.
On a less scientific note, my personal observations as an experienced teacher lead me to believe that using the ARCS strategies created more motivated learners. If motivation is related to enthusiasm and energy, the Readers Rally team members had an abundance of motivation. In my eight years of teaching, I have never seen a group of students as enthusiastic and energetic as these. As the Readers Rally meetings continued and the core group of active members formed, the students bonded. They were upbeat and positive, and there was a camaraderie about the group that was evident. In the classroom, games and competition can sometimes lead to cries of unfairness or complaints about another student’s performance. The Readers Rally members, however, engaged in competition in a friendly, sportsmanlike way. Perhaps the difference is the emphasis on being a team member; perhaps the difference lies in the type of children who are ardent readers. From my observations of the enthusiasm, liveliness, and encouraging attitude of the group, the team meetings were positive, engaging learning experiences for the members.
Conclusions from the Evidence
- The students who participated in Readers Rally were already highly motivated, as shown by the averages on the pre-survey.
- Using the ARCS model had a positive effect on the reading motivation dimensions of Challenge, Recognition, and Competition.
- While a negative effect was shown for the Social dimension, this may be due to the more relaxed atmosphere when the students took the post-survey.
- Using the ARCS model had a positive effect on students’ reading motivation as self-reported on the reflection instrument.
- Using the ARCS model helped create an atmosphere that motivated students enough to want to repeat the program.
- The students who remained active in the program were more compliant, and attached greater importance to reading, than the students who dropped out of the program.
- The specific strategies that students felt were most interesting (listed as favorites on the reflection) were mainly related to the Competition dimension.
Recommendations
- Implications for Practice
While it is not necessary that every media specialist use the ARCS model, it is important that media specialists consider motivation factors in their instruction. Students who are bored, or who don’t see the relevance of a lesson, are probably not going to retain as much information as those who are motivated to learn. The ARCS model, with its memory-aiding acronym, is an easy way for media specialists to plan and consider motivational strategies.
- Educational Significance
The success of using the ARCS strategies as a framework for a reading promotion program is important, because reading is vital to achievement in school. With students increasingly drawn to other activities such as sports, video games, and surfing MySpace, it is more important than ever that media specialists promote reading as a fun, engaging activity. Including motivation strategies as a part of reading promotion helps provide that engagement. By encouraging reading, we will help students become better readers. In addition, students who are excited and motivated about reading may share that excitement with others, thus creating a school culture where reading is important and valued.
Reflection
As a media specialist, I will use ARCS strategies as a framework for teaching. Because such a high percentage of the students stated that they will participate in Readers Rally again next year, the program can be considered a success. Using ARCS strategies, whether in reading promotions or information literacy instruction, will help me as a media specialist to make sure that I am not just focusing on content or skills, but on implementing instruction that is engaging and motivating.
I will continue to use action research in my role as media specialist. While sometimes challenging and time-consuming, action research promotes the analysis and reflection that help improve a media program. In addition, in the now data-driven world of education, action research provides data that can be used to justify media programs and activities.
Overall Conclusion and Summary
Because reading is so important to success in school, I focused my study on using the ARCS motivation model as a framework for meetings of Readers Rally, a program in which students read from the list of twenty books nominated for the Georgia Book Award, and participate in a quiz bowl-type competition. The ARCS model states that motivation strategies should focus on four areas: attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction. Participants in the program were students who volunteered, and included 11 sixth graders, 9 seventh graders, and 9 eighth graders. At the beginning of the program, I administered Wigfield and Guthrie’s Motivation for Reading Questionnaire (MRQ). For each of the team meetings, I used various ARCS motivation strategies. At the last meeting before the team competition to determine which team members would represent our school at the county competition, I administered the MRQ again. At the final meeting of the team, I administered a student reflection with four open-ended questions.
Results of the MRQ show that the students who participated in Readers Rally were already highly motivated. The post-MRQ showed the most positive effects in the areas of Challenge, Recognition, and Competition. Results of the student reflection indicate that half of the students felt that their reading habits had changed as a result of Readers Rally, and 93% of the students will participate in Readers Rally again next year. These results could indicate that using ARCS motivation strategies helped create a successful and motivating instructional program. Based on these results, I will use ARCS strategies when providing instruction or designing reading promotions in order to keep students interested and engaged so that they may receive the full benefits of the instruction or promotion.