Motivation in Online Learning: From Theory to Practice

written by Hui-Ching Kayla Hsu,
Postdoctoral Researcher/Instructional Designer at Tandon Online



Rakesh Kumar Behera received his M.S. and Ph.D. in materials science and engineering from the University of Florida, M.S. in mechanical engineering from Louisiana State University, and an undergraduate degree in metallurgical engineering from National Institute of Technology Durgapur in India. Prior to joining NYU, Behera worked as a post-doctoral fellow in the Nuclear Engineering Program and as a post-doctoral fellow and research scientist in the School of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Behera uses various active-learning techniques to improve both undergraduate and graduate student learning in STEM education. Along with the experience of in-class teaching, Behera is extremely excited to have the opportunity to develop online courses.

“I never teach my pupils, I only attempt to provide the conditions in which they can learn.” - Albert Einstein

In the early days of my career as an instructional designer specializing in online education, I sometimes heard instructors express their thoughts in a variation of this statement: “I already placed all the materials online, it’s up to the students now if they want to learn.” While providing access to the materials is one condition for students to learn, other conditions can facilitate learning. As stated in the humble reflection from one of the greatest scientists, Albert Einstein, a learner-centered pedagogy invites us to consider “the conditions in which students can learn.” 

In this article, we will cover how a motivation theory can serve as a framework to support students in online learning, and we will hear how a first-time online instructor, Prof. Rakesh Kumar Behera, strives to provide optimal conditions for learning to occur in the context of an online course. An outline of how to support online learners based on the SDT framework is provided at the end of this article.

One of the motivation theories I often refer to when designing online courses is Self-Determination Theory (SDT). SDT proposes that human beings have three basic psychological needs: 

• autonomy
• competence
• relatedness

When these needs are satisfied, an individual tends to become self-determined, which in turn promotes his/her well-being [1]. In academic contexts, for example, students perceive autonomy when they can:

• make choices about their learning
• gain competency when receiving timely, constructive feedback
• perceive a stronger degree of relatedness when feeling connected with their instructor, classmates, and learning materials. 

While a considerable body of research has confirmed that SDT tenets work in the traditional face-to-face classroom environment [2,3,4,5], applying these concepts in the online environment can be a different story.

I worked with Prof. Behera from the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering when he decided to develop his first fully online course in Non-Destructive Evaluation in 2017. At the beginning of his course development with Tandon Online, Prof. Behera gradually realized the difference between online and face-to-face instruction.

“I found that when you started your presentation for asynchronous online teaching, where you don’t have a live interaction with students, you have to motivate them.”

At the beginning of each video, Prof. Behera would usually think about how to make it more relevant to students by providing real-life examples, presenting engaging visual elements, or asking interesting questions that are related to what students have learned previously. To gauge student engagement with the online materials, he would set aside time to strategically plan a weekly discussion forum activity.

“I asked open-ended questions at the beginning of the week, and asked students to provide input, and then they were required to respond to at least two postings throughout the week.”

He noticed that these open-ended questions prompted students to apply the knowledge they gained from the online modules. During the discussion, a lot of questions came up, and students would address some of the questions among themselves. By the end of the week, he would encourage students to send in questions by email if they still had any. This structure has been effective in promoting relatedness in his online course.As Prof. Behera points out:

“Online students now think quite a lot before they ask a question. They’re asking deeper questions because the discussions are being used to address more in-depth doubts.”

In terms of supporting student autonomy, Prof. Behera retained what he was doing in his face-to-face class. He invites active participation during the class and lets students select the area they want to focus on for the final research project. However, he would like to provide more scaffolding for online students to help them feel confident in completing their papers on time with quality (competence). He broke the project into smaller components and listed resources, milestones, and rubrics in the project guidelines. For example, the first three weeks of the semester is set aside for students to explore an area they want to research more. A suggested topic list is provided for students who do not know how to start, and where to look for relevant readings. A checklist is also included in the project guideline for students to see if they are on the right track (feedback on the progress). Finally, before students turn in their final papers, they conduct a peer review based on the detailed rubrics Prof. Behera has provided (feedback on the work).

“You need to be very elaborate in terms of preparing an online course. The preparation time is longer, and the materials that you prepared are much richer.”

Using various active learning strategies to support students’ needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, Prof. Behera submitted the 2019 faculty proposal to the American Society for Nondestructive Testing (ASNT) and was awarded a grant for his online NDE course development. ASNT awards up to two faculty grants in the US each year, and Prof. Behera’s passion for teaching and the effort he invested in the course development helped him obtain the grant.

Here is an outline of how to support learners’ needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the online learning environments.

Autonomy:

• Allow students to make meaningful decisions about their learning (e.g. select a topic for their final project)
• Encourage students to think about their own goals when taking the course (e.g. gain insights about certain career choices through taking the course)
• Provide students with additional applications and rationales for activities and materials (e.g. inform students about skill/knowledge they will gain after completing an activity)

Competence:

• Balance the challenge/difficulty of a given task with student ability/skill. (e.g. anticipate the potential struggles students might have and provide resources accordingly)
• Set clear goals and scaffold materials or activities (e.g. set milestones and check-in points)
• Provide feedback for students to recognize their progress and identify area of refinement (e.g. use rubrics to provide clear feedback)

Relatedness:

• Foster an inclusive learning environment (e.g. encourage different ways of thinking in the discussion forums)
• Design activities to students to exchange feedback or work with one another (e.g. organize peer-review process before students turning in major assignments)
• Provide instructor-to-student interaction (e.g. offer office hours and encourage students to attend)

More information about this and other pedagogical frameworks for online learning, including links to online learning modules and other useful resources can be found on the TETRS website at https://sites.google.com/nyu.edu/nyutetrs/additional-resourcesfaq.

References

1. Edward L and Richard M. Ryan. 2012. Self-determination theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, and E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (p. 416–436).
2. Edward L. Deci, Robert J. Vallerand, Luc G. Pelletier, and Richard M. Ryan. 1991. Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational psychologist, 26, 3-4 (1991), 325-346.
3. Jang, Hyungshim, Eun Joo Kim, and Johnmarshall Reeve. 2012. Longitudinal test of self- determination theory's motivation mediation model in a naturally occurring classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 4 (2012), 1175-1188.
4. Johnmarshall Reeve. 2002. Self-determination theory applied to educational settings. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of Self-determination Research (pp. 183–203). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
5. Williams, Geoffrey C., and Edward L. Deci. 1996. Internalization of biopsychosocial values by medical students: a test of self-determination theory." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 4 (1996), 767.