Subscribe

Your email:

More from Allen Interactions:

5myths

ZEBRAZAPPS

describe the image

describe the image

WhitePapers

Connect with Us!

Facebookdescribe the imagedescribe the image

Posts by category

e-Learning Leadership Blog

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

In Designing e-Learning Motivation Makes all the Difference

  
  
  
Ethan Edwardsby Ethan Edwards, chief instructional strategist

This July 4th holiday weekend gave me another reminder about the unique importance of personal motivation in performance environments.  As regular readers of this blog have figured out, in addition to my jet-setting life as designer of e-learning, I ‘m also operating a family organic produce farm in Southern Illinois.  Out of a combination of tradition, choice, and stupidity we continue to operate using largely non-mechanized methods; so naturally the holiday weekend was spent almost entirely working by hand in the dirt in blazing-hot temperatures. My 87-year-old parents toiled away in spite of pain and infirmity, motivated by sense of tradition and values unique to them.  Meanwhile, my lovely visiting nieces and nephews made spotty efforts at helping but didn’t stick with anything more than a few minutes.  The challenge and discomfort was greater than their motivation to help could overcome, in spite of their sincere good intentions to be of use.

MotivationNow I don’t want this to sound like an “In the good old days people knew how to work” argument because I don’t believe that at all.  It really was so much an issue of personal motivation.  No amount of pleading to rest for the holiday or to cut off because of the heat could lessen my parents’ motivation to plant, to weed, to care for the vegetables, in spite of all the environmental factors working against that.  Similarly, no amount of nudging, lecturing, modeling, or even royal edict could motivate the kids to do much.  What was deeply personal to one group was irrelevant and pointless to another.

This is exactly the problem we face so often as designers of e-learning.  Our subject matter experts or project owners live and breathe the content we are to teach. And they expect that the same values that have given significance to the content for them over many years can be directly transferred to the learners.  Unfortunately, that’s impossible.  To get learners engaged in understanding new content and performing new skills, we as designers need to tie the content to some motivation existing in the learner, or to manufacture an urgency (using game design, networking, or simulation aspects) that the learners buy into.  This is important in all learning, but particularly so in e-learning where learners are, for the most part, working entirely on their own.

So equal to the task of analyzing content and designing instruction is the challenge of understanding our learners and designing interactivity that will provide personal motivation.  And if you have to err on one side or another—creating perfectly crafted content or building motivating instructional interactions-- I’d err on the side of creating the compelling interactivity.  With the right motivation, learners will figure out ways to make meaning out of even poorly designed content.  But there’s no way to impose motivation on the most beautifully structured content without considerable planning and insight. 

Here are some ideas for designing for motivation:

  • Ensure learners are aware of meaningful consequences
  • Develop a sense of risk
  • Ensure the learner benefits from adaptive content and branching
  • Draw the learner in by expert storytelling and creation of suspense
  • Appreciate the aesthetic appeal of graphics and media
  • Engage in meta-thinking with questions whose importance is elevated through multiple-step tasks and delayed judgment

Taking the time to really understand one’s audience and what motivates them will reward the designer many times over in engagement and active metal processing that results from powerfully-designed and relevant training tasks.

Comments

Nice piece, Ethan. I've been thinking about motivation a lot lately -- specifically about how to determine what motivates particular audiences (e.g. advancement is motivating for some, but for others who are motivated by security, advancement can be scary). Wondering if there's a good inventory for that kind of thing...
Posted @ Wednesday, July 07, 2010 9:33 AM by Julie Dirksen
Hmmmmm. 
 
The "Sedona Method" teaches that all human motivations reduce down to 4 basic human desires; the desire for acceptance, control, security, and separateness. At each stage in a person's life, one or more of those desires arise as more dominant than the others. When considering one's intended audience, it is probably good to keep those kinds of ideas in mind.
Posted @ Thursday, July 08, 2010 4:29 PM by Nancy Clarke
I think motivation theories do not explain well what really motivates human beings. I like Daniel Pink's statement about motivation which you can read in "Drive": "The secret to high performance and satisfaction -at work, at school, and at home- is the deeply human need to direct our own lives, to learn and create new things, and to do better by ourselves and our world". 
 
The question is whether that principle applies to everyone or not. I like it because in some way, it explains what motivates me, but when I observe different younger generations I wouldn´t be quiet sure. However, this principle creates the foundation for other implications in e-learning design. I could think of: 
 
- Let the participant to have most of the control of the course. 
 
- Open space so he/she can think about new ways to applicate or practice what he/she's learning. 
 
- Make participants to think in new senses of what they'are learning: How can what they're learning contribute to something more trascendental than his/her current duties. 
 
Very interesting topic, so much to think about....
Posted @ Friday, July 09, 2010 8:01 AM by Carlos Serrano
I find the motivation research very interesting, and agree that most things we humans choose to do can ultimately be traced to a few core motivations. I like that list of the basic human desires you quoted from the “Sedona Method.” Those factors seem more compelling than the motivations that people talked about in these types of discussions years ago when I was in graduate school (food, safety, reproduction, etc.) 
I sometimes question, though, how applicable it is to do this kind of reductionist analysis when talking about the motivational aspects of things people do not by their own choice—like most corporate training. The source of motivation to complete an activity that someone else is telling you to do, I think, may be quite different from the factors that shape your own decisions and engagement. 
Nonetheless, providing individualized and adaptive structures (separateness); self-determination of sequence, pacing and review (control); operation in a safe, controlled, and trusted environment (security), and providing interactivity to foster thinking and exploration rather than judgment (acceptance) are all really powerful design strategies that tend to draw in and maintain learner interest to successful e-learning programs. 
Posted @ Friday, July 09, 2010 12:27 PM by Ethan Edwards
Comments have been closed for this article.