This paper will examine and contrast the motivational models of Keller’s Confidence, Satisfaction, Relevance and Attention (ARCS) and Wlodkowski’s Time Continuum. Keller’s approach includes four basic motivating tactics, each with multiple subcategories. The Attention technique requires the instructor to acquire and maintain the student’s attention through perceptual arousal through the use of novel, shocking, odd, or confusing skills in education. Inquiry arousal will occur through promoting intrusive conduct and having the novice produce requests or a problem to solve. Inconsistency occurs when the learner’s consciousness is maintained by altering the instructional edifice pieces.
The second motivating method is familiarity, which is the first subcategory of relevance. In this subcategory, the instructor employs a particular conversational style, as well as images and hypotheses that are related to the learner’s prior experiences. The learner will be aided in assimilation of the new facts by the knowledge gained before. Goal orientation is a subtype of goal orientation. where the course objectives and goals are stated and confirmed with a clear knowledge of the student’s objectives Motive matching is a subcategory in which student characteristics are matched with appropriate teaching approaches and strategies.
Keller’s third motivating method is Confidence. The teacher will make the student cognizant of the requirements of the performance, conditions, and evaluation norms through an expectation of success. Numerous achievement levels will be supplied, allowing students to define personal scholarly objectives and performance requirements as a challenge setting that will allow them to attain academic success. When an instructor provides feedback to a student, attribution molding occurs. This occurs when the teacher urges the student to put out more effort and continue to practice the abilities he or she has recently mastered.
Keller’s fourth and last motivational approach is satisfaction. The teacher allows a student to put a newly gained skill or knowledge into practice in a real or simulated situation, and urges the learner to study for the sheer joy of learning something new and exciting. The instructor can help the student sustain the desired behavior by providing feedback and reinforcement, which falls under the category of extrinsic incentives or positive consequences. The teacher shall ensure consistent intellectual assessments and final outcome for all learners for each assignment brief under the subclass of equity.
The Time Continuum Model of Motivation, developed by Wlodkowski, is a training paradigm based on semantics, neuropsychology, as well as motivation study. The Time Continuum model highlights three different periods in the process of learning wherever motivation emerges. They mark the start, middle, and finish of a time period. Learner attitudes toward learning are shaped by the critical first phase. Its two primary aspects are the learner’s basic requirements at the time of learning and the atmosphere, instructor, subject matter, and self.
During this time, the teacher must try to build a positive learner mindset and determine how to best meet the student’s academic needs while also minimizing student anxiety. Wlodkowski’s model’s while period is concerned with the developments of stimulation impacting the learning environment of the student and their emotional experiences while learning. During this time, the instructor will work hard to keep the kids engaged and will depend on any big sensitive experiences to develop a pleasant experience for them. The unique finishing period’s key topic is competence and reinforcing (Chinn, 2001). The teacher will attempt to ensure that the learner’s sentiments are solidified throughout the learning process.
Both Wlodkowski’s and Keller’s motivational tactics models are well-known comprehensive approaches. They both wish to “synthesize numerous areas of study concerned with motivation in order to include different instructional strategies into the formative assessment with the objective of enhancing learner motivation,” according to Wlodkowski. There is, however, a variation to be seen between the two methods.
Keller’s ARCS theory encourages the use of all four aspects throughout and didactic involvement but does not define when they should be used in the instructional progression, whereas Wlodkowski suggests clear tactics to utilize depending on the length of the educational participation. (Wlodkowski 1985) agrees that different time frames can use different motivating approaches. Wlodkowski thinks that when a student completes a learning assignment effectively and feels satisfied, He or she is inspired to study more since he or she feels good about the outcome. Keller comes up with a similar concept within his techniques for relevance, confidence, and happiness. Other researchers with Wlodkowski that when learning occurs, the student will be further encouraged to continue with the educational learning process since successful encounters in the learning progression will be reinforced. Keller’s satisfaction technique is using reinforcement and feedback to keep the learner’s desired academic conduct. Regardless of the fact that Wlodkowski firmly believes on using crucial period periods while Keller does not, the same speculations that Wlodkowski encourages with his variables of competence, stimulation, reinforcement, attitude, affect and need, are shared by Keller’s attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction strategies.
Keller’s ARCS model, according to Wlodkowski, circuitously encompasses his Time Continuum Model of Motivation model six motivation features. Both Keller’s and Wlodkowski’s approaches enhance motivation by increasing attention in the area of concern, making impartial knowledge practical, emphasizing personal aptitude and attributes as a component of achievement, and confirming an intrinsic understanding of the pleasure that comes from learning. Because both models were developed utilizing advances in motivation and related domains, they both advocate many of the same tactics. Some people favor Keller’s organized and tidy method, while others prefer Wlodkowski’s important time periods. In terms of motivation, any model would provide equivalent learning experiences.
The ARCS model, while similar to Wlodkowski’s method, differs in two key aspects. The first is where the ARCS model’s strategy options are derived from a succession of groups and subgroupings based on a diverse set of perceptions human motivation theories, philosophies, and hypotheses The second distinction is that the problem-solving models are Wlodkowski’s Time Continuum model and Keller’s ARCS model methodology. The selection of tactics is based on a well-organized and efficient layout a process that takes into account the motivation of the audience (Millman et al, 2019). (Michelle Wang 2006) suggests that when instructors use either or both of Wlodkowski and Keller’s two models of motivation, they should transform and adjust exhibition layout and strategies, give quantifiable and particular illustrations and comparisons, and ensure that the learners obtain constant positive reinforcement from the educators.
Conclusion
It is simple to compare and employ the two ideas together when training others in the educational area when reading the original writings of both writers in regard to the motivating models they built. The majority of other psychologists and educators in the field believe that the two theories are comparable in many ways and may be utilized simultaneously, however some may favor one over the other. I can see the benefits of utilizing them separately or together.
References
Brand, R., & Cheval, B. (2019). Theories to explain exercise motivation and physical inactivity: ways of expanding our current theoretical perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1147. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01147/full
Carr, A. M., & Carr, C. S. (2006). Integrating instructional design in distance education. Retrieved February 20, 2006 from http://ide.ed.psu.edu/idde/ARCS.htm
McKivigan, J. (2019). Keller’s ARCS Model and Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction. Journal of Educational Studies, 5(1), 1-2. https://www.cheescube.com/open-access/kellers-arcs-model-and-gagnes-nine-events-of-instruction.pdf
Milman, N. B., & Wessmiller, J. (2020). the Online Learner Using Keller’s ARCS Model. Designing and Teaching Online Courses During Uncertain Times: A Special Issue of Distance Learning Ends and Means Columns, Distance Learning-Volume 17# 4, 33 https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=rBcuEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA33&dq=keller%27s+arcs+model&ots=axx51tZOc9&sig=c7k7Oa9My2cBp8FUPIY3RntR8bM .
Wlodkowski, R. J. (1985). Enhancing adult motivation to learn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bas https://www.googleadservices.com/pagead/aclk?sa=L&ai=DChcSEwjSp8TR8Yj2AhVX43cKHYMMA7wYABAAGgJlZg&ae=2&ohost=www.google.com&cid=CAESWuD2C9zHjlvr2rhY2d5aug_ipo_86DZog6x1fNcWdF5IQMwzZbKmrdA_1OqiheEMAk5Lpc9-xPCRb2fx7m-mUT-8tntrfSKCFV1m6Yt500e_ArAev9rP9nOEgw&sig=AOD64_2A2Zwn3kt5eO_lx0Cp9hPtJC0dEQ&q&adurl&ved=2ahUKEwjn27jR8Yj2AhVxwAIHHdemCD0Q0Qx6BAgDEAEs.
write