See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/261760340

Applying the ARCS model of motivational design to pharmaceutical education

Article  in  American journal of pharmaceutical education · June 2000

CITATIONS READS
30 3,664

1 author:

Supakit Wongwiwatthananukit
University of Hawaiʻi at Hilo
57 PUBLICATIONS   231 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Supakit Wongwiwatthananukit on 06 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Statements

Applying the ARCS Model of Motivational Design to

Pharmaceutical Education

Supakit Wongwiwatthananukit
Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand

Nicholas G. Popovich1
School of Pharmacy and Pharmacal Sciences, Purdue University, Heine Pharmacy Building, West Lafayette IN 47907-1330

Instruction, even when designed and based on sound instructional principles, oftentimes does not stimu-
late students’ motivation to learn. The result may be that students may not be motivated to pursue life-
long learning and use the knowledge and skills learned to deliver pharmaceutical care. The purpose of
this article is to provide an overview of the Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction (ARCS)
Model developed in education and demonstrate a systematic approach of motivational design with prac-
tical application that can be incorporated into a pharmaceutical educator’s instruction (e.g., “tool box”). It
is intended to help the educator identify components of instruction that either increase or decrease stu-
dent motivation to learn. It also provides motivational strategies which an educator can incorporate into
the instruction plan to make it responsive to the interests and needs of students. Using motivational
design to create motivational strategies and then incorporating these into the instruction can result in com-
plementary enhancement of student learning and achievement.

“In the yeast of every student body there is a ferment
of idealism and emotional virility waiting for the
proper climate to burst forth into the stuff of which
good education is made. In every good teacher there
must be a vigor, vitality, and an exuberance permeat-
ing everything he does in the classroom. The result
will be people learning—not just being taught. There
must be a motivation from within to learn, and it must
be planted or nurtured as the case may be. If it can
be done on an individual basis, fine, but if larger
classes prevent this, there is no reason for dismay;
rapport with students need have nothing to do with
numbers. It isn ‘t necessary to coddle students; most
need only guidance and opportunity; and some, a
motivating force. The force may be you.... “
Melvin R. Gibson, 1959 (1)
The term motivation is derived from the Latin verb movere,
which means to set into motion(2). Motivation is something
that gets a person going, keeps the person moving, and helps
the person to get the accomplished jobs. Conversely, a demo-
tivated person does not have the motive nor desire that moves
him/her toward action (e.g., learning). Keller(3) noted that an
educator cannot really motivate anybody. However, it is pos-
sible to create or change the learning conditions/environment
so that individual students can motivate themselves. It is pos-
sible that an educator can teach, and teach well, without hav-
ing the students learn. Students may reluctantly learn things
that do not mean anything to them. They may only memorize
the content and “memory erase” it after an examination or a
course. They also may choose not to use or apply what they
have learned, and may actually dislike it.
There is no doubt that such students do not always have
the motivation to learn. As Stephen Yelon(4) describes in his
book Powerful Principles of Instruction, four common attribut-
es of excellent educators are: (i) caring about the subject mat-
ter that they teach; (ii) caring about their students’ learning and
believing that their students have the ability to learn; (iii) car-
ing about the job of teaching and enjoying the process of ana-
lyzing, planning, creating, delivering, and improving their
instruction; and (iv) applying what they know about motiva-
tion, learning, and transfer to make their instruction effective.
Motivation is one component of the set of principles that excel-
lent educators apply to their instruction to help students under-
stand the importance of a content area so they will want to con-
tinue to learn and use and apply what they have learned.
Motivation is an important quality that affects students’ suc-
cess in learning and performance. Students who are motivated
to learn tend to engage in activities they believe will help them
learn. They are likely to attend to the educator’s instruction
and mentally organize and rehearse the material to commit it to
memory. They also take meaningful notes to facilitate subse-
quent studying, periodically check their level of comprehen-
sion, and request help/guidance when they realize they do not
understand the material. These activities improve the quality
of student learning(2). However, Keller(3) noted that overmo-
tivation can also be a problem. Students who are overmotivat-
ed may claim or believe that they already know the content
(i.e., overconfidence) and tend to pay little attention in class,
1
Corresponding author
Am. J. Pharm. Educ., 64, 188-196(2000); received 1/19/00; accepted 4/5/00.

188 American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Vol. 64, Summer 2000

Fig. 1. A model of motivation, performance, and instructional influence, describing a connection of personal and environmental inputs on effort-
performance-consequences (5). Figure reproduced with permission of the Association for Educational Communication and Technology,
Bloomington, Indiana.
may become a disruptive influence to other enrolled students,
and may make more mistakes/errors and lose efficiency as a
consequence.
In contrast, students who are not motivated to learn do not
put forth their best effort to learn. They may be inattentive dur-
ing the instruction and may not organize or rehearse the mate-
rial to be learned. Note taking may be done haphazardly, if at
all. They may not monitor their level of understanding or even
ask for assistance when they do not understand what is being
taught. These habits limit students’ potential for learning and
skill development and result in low levels of productivity(2,3).
Although the importance of motivation as a positive influence
on learning is acknowledged in the literature(2,5,6), there is
less attention toward incorporating motivation into instruction-
al plans to improve the motivational appeal of courses. In edu-
cation, one particular model developed by Keller(3,7,8), the
Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction (ARCS)
Model, focuses on creating, stimulating, and maintaining moti-
vational strategies used for instructional design. This model
emphasizes strategies and motivational design that an instruc-
tional designer or educator can include in the instructional
design/plan process. The motivational strategies can be used in
influencing students’ motivation to learn and in solving prob-
lems associated with learning motivation by allowing educa-
tors to create a motivating learning environment. Studies eval-
uating this model in application have provided evidence to sup-
port the validity of the four basic constructs and their positive
effects on student attitude and performance(9,10).
The pharmacy profession, in the past four decades, has
evolved from a traditional product orientation to a patient-
focused orientation and has adopted the practice paradigm of
pharmaceutical care(11). Pharmaceutical care is the responsi-
ble provision of drug therapy for the purpose of achieving def
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Vol. 64, Summer 2000
inite outcomes that improve a patient’s quality of life. These
outcomes are: (i) cure of a disease; (ii) elimination or reduction
of a patient’s symptomatology; (iii) arresting or slowing of a
disease process; or (iv) preventing a disease or symptomatol-
ogy. By practicing pharmaceutical care, pharmacists have the
potential to reduce the occurrence of drug misadventures
described by Manasse(12,13). Such misadventures cause poor
health outcomes for patients and cost an estimated tens of bil-
lions of dollars annually. Johnson and Bootman(14) have
argued that by preventing avoidable drug misadventures, phar-
macists may cut the associated costs in half, which in 1994
were estimated to cost the U.S. health care system over $70 bil-
lion dollars per year. Subsequently, this has been confirmed
through numerous studies which have documented the positive
impact on patient care that pharmacists can have(15).
With this evolution, the American Association of College
of Pharmacy’s (AACP) Commission to Implement Change in
Pharmaceutical Education has recognized the increased role
that schools/colleges of pharmacy must take in their responsi-
bility as the resource for new practitioners for the profession.
The graduates must be capable of entering practice with at least
a minimal level of competence and with the skills needed to
continue to increase competence. New practitioners need
appropriate education and skill development opportunities to
prepare them to provide medications and services within the
framework of practicing pharmaceutical care. The
Commission has laid out a carefully crafted strategic plan to
advance the profession through education. The Commission’s
Background Papers I(16) and II(17) encouraged the concept of
pharmaceutical care as the mission of pharmacy practice.
Further, it proposed a curricular direction within schools/col-
leges that focuses on student achievement of ability-based out-
come goals and on the educational processes necessary to ful
189
fill pharmaceutical education’s mission in the preparation of its
students to enter practice and deliver pharmaceutical care. To
perform this function, pharmaceutical education must facilitate
student acquisition of the relevant knowledge base, skills, atti-
tudes, ethics, and values. It stresses the importance of student
acquisition of performance-based competencies that underlie a
professional person and contributing citizen. The Commission
also laid out one of the general competencies/outcomes that
graduates must have - motivation for continued learning. It
emphasizes that the curriculum must instill in students a spirit
of intellectual inquiry and curiosity and a motivation for learn-
ing and must equip students to learn throughout their profes-
sional lives.
The Commission views most students who enter health
professional schools, including pharmacy, as dependent learn-
ers. They enter with a perception that it is the educator’s
responsibility to teach students while de-emphasizing, if not
ignoring, their responsibility of students to learn on their own.
Students come to pharmacy schools adept at memorizing facts,
and the teaching methods at most schools focus on this ability.
This method of learning is diametrically opposed to the way
the pharmacist is asked to practice. Specifically, the responsi-
bility to learn must reside with the pharmacist. Therefore,
schools must do a better job of preparing students for the real-
ities of practice through the shifting of the educational process
to a balance between the educator and the students. Methods
for achieving this process must involve students as active
learners through activities, including among others, problem
solving, cooperative learning, developmental discussions, sim-
ulations, questions, early practice experience, laboratories,
recitations, reading assignments, problem sets, presentations,
writing, and role playing. For pharmacy educators to prepare
competent future practitioners who will contribute a positive
influence to society, they must know how to design courses of
instruction that foster students’ active learning effectively and
efficiently. Further, they must also know how to make the
instruction more appealing to motivate and inspire students to
learn. Improving the motivational appeal of courses can result
in complementary gains in students’ successes in learning, in
developing the goal to pursue life-long learning, and in using
the knowledge and skills they have learned to deliver pharma-
ceutical care.
This paper describes how to understand the motivation to
learn in terms of the background of the ARCS Model, the
model’s four major categories, their subcategories and motiva-
tional strategies, and how to use and design them into a course,
instruction, or lesson. It intends to help pharmaceutical educa-
tors think about motivation in terms of four specific areas of
influence on the motivation to learn, and to assist them gener-
ate, select, and design motivational strategies into their instruc-
tion. The ARCS Model has been used and applied in specific
kinds of instructional settings such as computer-based instruc-
tion 18), textual material(19), and instructor-led lecture for-
mal(10). This paper focuses primarily on instructor-led cours-
es.
THE ARCS MODEL
The Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction
(ARCS) Model of Motivational Design (a.k.a., Keller’s ARCS
Model of Motivation, The ARCS Model, Keller’s Model) was
developed in the early 1980s by John Keller(3,6-8,20). The
model was systematically derived from his theory of motiva-
tion, performance, and instructional influence developed in the
190 American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Vol. 64, Summer 2000
late 1970s(5,6). Keller’s theoretical model of motivation, per-
formance, and instructional influence is a macro theory that
describes a network of the relationships of personal and envi-
ronmental characteristics on effort, performance, and conse-
quences (Figure 1). More specifically, in a motivational con-
text, it assumes that effort is a consequence of motives or val-
ues, and of expectancy for success. Reinforcement serves to
confirm or deny expectations. This theory is based upon a syn-
thesis of many areas of research that pertain to human motiva-
tion, and its purpose is to help answer questions about how to
design motivational strategies into instruction that will stimu-
late or sustain learners’ motivation to learn. In other words, the
purpose of this theory is to identify major categories of vari-
ables of individual behavior and of instructional design that are
related to individual effort (motivation) and performance.
The theory integrates a large number of specific motiva-
tional concepts: not only expectancy-value theory, attribution
theory, self-efficacy theory, learned helplessness, social learn-
ing theory, environmental theories, humanistic theories,
aspects of attitude theory, and decision theory, but also the
effect of reinforcement on motivation as well as cognitive eval-
uation and equity theory as the foundation of the theory to
explain individual motivational tendencies. As illustrated in
Figure 1, motives or values are subdivided into two major cat-
egories called attention (A) and relevance (R). Expectancy is
referred to as a category called confidence (C). The influence
of consequences and cognitive evaluation are the effect of a
category called reinforcing value or satisfaction (S) of instruc-
tion on motivation (effort).
The theory of motivation, performance, and instructional
influence also distinguishes between three types of influence of
instructional design (i.e., motivational design and manage-
ment, learning design and management, reinforcement-contin-
gency design and management). The assumption is that any
instructional event, whether it is an educator in a classroom or
a module on a microcomputer, will have these three influences;
and the task of instructional design is to understand and control
them.
The ARCS model is a systematic means of improving the
motivational appeal of instructional materials, of educator
behavior, and of the way in which lessons or modules and
courses are designed(20). It helps an educator to identify the
component of instruction that either increases or decreases stu-
dent motivation to learn and also provides motivational strate-
gies which an educator can use to make instruction responsive
to the interests and needs of students. This model was created
because of the lack of guidance that presently exists for
improving the motivational quality of instruction. There have
been many writings about how to design instruction that will
be effective if students want to learn, but there is relatively lit-
tle that demonstrates to an educator how to make the instruc-
tion more appealing.
Four major categories (i.e., attention, relevance, confi-
dence, satisfaction) influence a student’s motivation to
learn(3,6-8,20). These are as follows:
Attention (A) refers to the extent to which the student’s
curiosity is aroused or gained and sustained
over time;
Relevance (R) refers to the student’s perception that the
instruction is related to personal/career needs
or goals;
Confidence (C) refers to the student’s perceived likelihood of
 achieving success through personal efforts
and control;
Satisfaction (S) refers to reinforcing accomplishment with
rewards from the instruction, which can
include internal and external factors.
According to the ARCS model, these four major categories
have to be met for students to become and remain motivat-
ed(7). Keller(7) views the task of motivating students as a
sequential learning process. First, an educator must gain a stu-
dent’s attention before any learning activities can commence.
The motivational goal is to achieve and sustain student cir-
cumspection. An educator must establish motivational strate-
gies that can sustain the student’s consideration to produce a
satisfactory level of attention throughout the instruction. After
getting the student’s attention and starting to present the mate-
rial, the student might be wondering “why do I have to learn
this thing?” (i.e., relevance). Before the student can be moti-
vated to learn, he/she must believe that the instruction is relat-
ed to his/her personal goals/career and will meet their specific
needs. Even with attentive students who envision personal rel-
evance in the instruction, an educator might still have less than
appropriately motivated students due to the confidence level of
the student. A student who underestimates his/her expectation
of success in learning might have fears/doubts about the sub-
ject and this could limit his/her potential of learning and skill
development. If he/she undertakes a task, he/she will probably
suffer from unnecessary anxiety and self-doubt that can
increase the possibility of task failure. In contrast, a student
who estimates his/her confidence in the subject to be learned at
a level far beyond his/her actual knowledge and skill level may
overlook important detail and skills in the instruction. He/she
can suffer from mastering the desired objectives of the instruc-
tion. Finally, an educator must establish a sense of satisfaction
in order for the student to have a continuing motivation to
learn. He/she should make learning pleasing so that students
are comfortable with what they have learned, and continue to
make learning satisfying/enriching so that students keep learn-
ing and applying what they have learned. He/she must give
students the opportunities to hone the skills learned.
The ARCS model includes three subcategories of motiva-
tional characteristics for each of four major categories, the
motivational strategies that stimulate or sustain each motiva-
tional element, and the associated process questions for each
subcategory(3,7,19). The associated process questions are the
questions that an educator must ask him-or herself as he/she is
designing or preparing to teach a course. All of the motiva-
tional strategies in the model are derived from research find-
ings and practice opportunities that have resulted in success-
fully motivated learners. The model provides a basis for pre-
scribing motivational strategies or solving motivational prob-
lems to meet the individual motivational requirements of the
situation, which eventually results in improving instruction so
that it is appealing as well as effective and efficient. The four
major categories, their subcategories and definitions, their
associated process questions, and corresponding motivational
strategies for stimulating motivation are summarized in the
Appendix.
The ARCS model helps an educator identify the compo-
nent of instruction that either increases or decreases a student’s
motivation to learn, and provide motivational strategies which
an educator can use to make instruction responsive to the inter-
ests and needs of students. It also provides four major distinct
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Vol. 64, Summer 2000
categories of motivational variables that help synthesize/create
research foci. For example, the educator can pursue applied
research projects according to the specific motivational cate-
gory (i.e., attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction)
and treat it as an independent variable (e.g., what motivational
category facilitates increased student performance).
The ARCS model is limited in its lack of specific, pre-
scriptive strategies(6). It allows the educator to create and
develop a variety of motivational strategies. The goal is to
increase student motivation. How the educator achieves this
may be different with each circumstance. For example, a
group of students may present a different motivational profile
and, therefore, require a different combination of motivational
strategies. In addition, the ARCS model requires experience
and judgement, and quite likely some trial-and-error from the
educator(9). The educator must understand the need to create
a unique solution for each unique problem to achieve the
desired goal of instruction. Decisions about the effectiveness
of any motivational strategies are affected by many factors, not
just motivational ones. Student gain scores and other achieve-
ment measures will not always reflect the role of motivation.
To judge motivational consequences, there is a need to use
direct measures such as instruments of persistence, intensity of
effort, emotion and attitude(9).
THE USE OF THE ARCS MODEL IN INSTRUCTIONAL
DESIGN
The ARCS Model describes the motivation to learn in terms of
four major categories and their subcategories (see Appendix).
For each of these, there are general process questions for the
educator to answer and motivational strategies to apply. By
themselves the categories do not guide an educator in how
many and what types of motivational strategies to use or how
to design them into the instruction. Thus, “motivational
design,” i.e., the use of the ARCS Model in an instructional
design will help answer these questions. The goal of motiva-
tional design is to make the instruction appealing(3).
There are four steps in applying the ARCS Model in prac-
tical fashion to instructional design, which is referred to as the
process of motivational design(3,22). The steps follow a gen-
eral systematic problem solving and design process, beginning
with an extensive student analysis which forms the basis for
identifying motivational objectives. These objectives guide
the design and subsequent development and implementation of
motivational strategies. These steps are as follows:
Step 1: Analyze the student and develop a motivational
profile based on ARCS.
This step provides a means for identifying gaps in the student’s
entry level motivation. The techniques used in conducting this
step can range from a “best guess” estimate based on the edu-
cator’s personal experience with previous similar students to a
judgement based on the collection and analysis of formal data
from conducting focus interviews with members of the target
population by using a questionnaire, or from other informed
persons (e.g., faculty who have taught the students previously).
The result of this step is the gathering of information which
determines whether the students will be below, at, or above the
appropriate level in each motivational category. This is need-
ed for formulating the motivational objectives of the instruc-
tion. Educators should be wary of taking students’ self-
descriptions at face value, however, given students’ well
191
known desire/intention to please educators with their respons-
es. Misjudgment of the students’ motivational categories in the
direction of overestimation or underestimation can result in
undesirable outcomes as mentioned earlier in this manuscript
(i.e., The ARCS Model).
Step 2: Define motivational objectives based on the stu-
dent profile and develop motivational measures.
The motivational objectives should be written from the student
perspective. These should specify the performance or attitude
that the educator desires to observe relative to the four ARCS
motivational categories. The objectives can be cognitive, affec-
tive, or psychomotor skills. For example, a psychomotor moti-
vational objective for attention that might be written is “Within
the assigned recitation group for the chronic renal failure case
in the pharmacotherapeutic course, each pharmacy student will
demonstrate a higher degree of attention through participation
in the group discussion to solve the drug-related problems in the
case.” A cognitive motivational objective for relevance that
might be generated is “By the end of the oral analgesic drugs
lecture, pharmacy students will be able to describe two benefits
of learning this content area in relation to their career goals.” A
cognitive motivational objective for confidence would be
“When given a homework case study assignment for smoking
cessation products, pharmacy students will indicate a higher
degree of confidence in their ability to select an appropriate
smoking cessation product for the patient who desires to quit
smoking.” An example of an affective motivational objective
for satisfaction is “Pharmacy students will rate their satisfaction
as highest with pharmacokinetics instruction as a result of
opportunities provided to apply what was learned (e.g., adjust-
ing the digoxin dose to a 45-year-old white male with conges-
tive heart failure in a patient-simulation laboratory).
After writing motivational objectives, methods for evalu-
ating the motivational strategy(ies) used should be developed
to determine whether the motivational objectives have been
met. The techniques used in evaluating the strategy(ies) can
include direct observation of specified behaviors (such as
choice of tasks, effort expended, and persistence); judgements
by observers of students on characteristics indicative of moti-
vation; interviews or conversations between two or more stu-
dents; and self-report questionnaires. Keller(3) suggested that
self-report measures can be very helpful when an educator
wants to focus on a particular area of concern. These measures
should be consistent with the objectives. An example of a self-
report measure to evaluate students’ confidence might be
achieved by asking students to assess their level of confidence
(e.g., none, low, moderate, high) to select a smoking cessation
product for a patient given certain patient variables/parameters.
Step 3: Design a motivational strategy for each motiva-
tional objective and integrate it into the instruction.
Keller(3) described three phases in this step: generation, selec-
tion, and integration. The generation phase deals with Keller’s
ARCS categories. These categories and their subcategories of
motivational strategies serve as a guide to generating motiva-
tional interventions (see Appendix). In this phase, an educator
should generate a list of potential motivational strategies for
each of the objectives. Keller(3) suggested that it is generally
best for an educator to use a “brainstorming approach” and an
“open, creative frame of mind” to generate a broad range of
strategy ideas. An example of gaining students’ attention is
192 American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Vol. 64, Summer 2000
provided in the following fictitious scenario. Dr. Martin teach-
es the second-professional year pharmacology course. In the
past, he normally began his lecture with an opening introduc-
tory statement such as, “Today we are going to study drugs
used to treat Alzheimer’s disease.” As he talked, he noticed
that some students were reading newspapers while others were
doing work for other classes. Some were falling asleep. He
realized that his past approach to educating students did not
capture any student attention. When he engaged them with
questions, he was impatient and provided answers to the stu-
dents right away. So, he decided that he would present an
unsolved case at the beginning of his discourse and ask ques-
tions of the students but not answer them. Thus, the next time
he taught this topic he started by asking the students, “Is there
a cure for Alzheimer’s disease? What are the causes of
Alzheimer’s disease? Are there any drugs that can cure it? Are
the drugs, food supplements, and herbs such as estrogen, vita-
min E, ginkgo biloba, a cure? Are there any drugs that can
make Alzheimer’s disease worse? These are the issues I would
like us to focus today.” His observation was that his students
were more enthusiastic and interested than normal, paid more
attention during class and tried to seek more information after
posing his questions by participating in debate and raising
questions about content that needed additional clarification.
Another example of making students satisfied and adding
relevance to the instruction is in an integrated laboratory ses-
sion whose goal is to teach second-professional-year students
how to properly use an asthma inhaler. These students already
had gained general knowledge of asthma drug therapy from a
prior lecture session. They feel competent in identifying and
solving drug-related problems but wanted to improve their
skills in counseling patients who use inhalers. Dr. John began
his introductory remarks by sharing a pleasant experience with
a former pharmacy student whom he taught. This pharmacist
shared that she worked in an out-patient clinic and applied the
skills which she learned in the laboratory to properly instruct
and counsel a patient with asthma who uses an inhaler. She
shared what a great reward it was to her to use it in the real-
world when providing pharmaceutical care to a patient. Dr.
John’s students indicate that he makes learning enjoyable
because he demonstrates to them the relevance of their knowl-
edge and skills that they have obtained in the “real world”.
An example of gaining students confidence is provided by
Dr. Andy, a professor who teaches a Nonprescription
Medicines course to third-professional-year pharmacy stu-
dents. For content and effort on homework assignments, he
gives separate scores or grades as well as positive and accurate
feedback. Homework assignments are given in case or sce-
nario formats (e.g., laxative products, cough and cold products)
that provide the student with challenging situations, some more
ambiguous than others, but that mirror the “real world”. These
ensure the student is actively involved in learning by encour-
aging him/her to use class notes and literature references to
solve the presented problem. His goal is to help his students
experience that the effort they put into the assignment is linked to
its overall quality. He also recognizes that there still may be
differences in student knowledge and skill. Nevertheless, he
continues to encourage students who try hard by giving them
high marks for effort, although they may need more work on
their problem-solving skills, content, grammar, and overall
writing skills. He uses this confidence boosting strategy in
terms of success opportunities to support or enhance students’
belief in themselves and their competence. He gives them per-
sonal responsibility and accountability opportunities to help
them realize that their success is based on effort and abilities.
Before producing an effective integration of motivational
strategies into the instruction, Keller(8) provided five guide-
lines that are helpful to critically reviewing the potential strate-
gies and selecting the ones to be used. He indicated that strate-
gies: (i) should not take up too much time; (ii) should not
detract from the learning objectives; (iii) should fall within the
time and money constraints of the development and imple-
mentation phases of the instruction; (iv) should be acceptable
to the students; and (v) should be compatible with the instruc-
tional methodology, including the educator’s style. The moti-
vational strategies included in the model are proven, but their
effectiveness, and the exact way in which they are implement-
ed depends in part on the personality of the educator and the
type of atmosphere that he or she wants (e.g., formal versus
informal) to create. Therefore, the final selection of strategies
for a given instructional event is based, in large part, on the
judgement and perhaps even some trial-and-error work of the
educator rather than an objective criteria.
The last phase of Step 3 is integration. This is the phase
that adapts motivational strategies selected to the specific
learning environment and then incorporates them into the
instructional plan.
Step 4: Develop, try out and revise the selected strategy as
necessary.
In this step, the motivational materials are prepared in con-
junction with the individual materials and are subjected to for-
mative evaluation based on the motivational criterion measures
developed in the second step. Small group try-outs or pilot
tests involve testing the motivational strategies along with
instructional materials on content experts (e.g., faculty, phar-
macists) and representatives of the target population (e.g.,
focus groups) to determine the appeal of the instruction and the
feasibility of the motivational activities. The importance of
this step is that motivation should be separated from other
aspects of the instruction(3). The educator should attempt to
be sensitive to the effects the instruction is having (i.e., desired
or undesired). Then, if the strategies are, for example, failing
to produce their intended results, they can be revised and
replaced.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
The ARCS model provides a systematic means of improving
the motivational appeal of the instruction. It is one of the tools
that the educators can use to help their students become and
stay motivated. The motivational design process bridges the
gap between the students and the learning outcomes by incor-
porating motivational strategies that match the motivational
needs of the particular class or students. The following hypo-
thetical case is used to illustrate how students’ low confidence
levels can be improved by using the ARCS model in identify-
ing and solving motivational problems in the classroom.
Case
Pharmacotherapeutic, clinical reasoning is an elective
two-credit course, meeting once a week for two hours. The
course is offered for the first time to third-professional-year
pharmacy students to foster pharmacotherapeutic reasoning
skill development as experienced in actual clinical practice and to
improve the integration of students’ knowledge, skills, and
attitudes into patient care before they participate in the
Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experience (i.e., clinical clerk-
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Vol. 64, Summer 2000
ships). The course encompasses several major areas of drug
therapy (e.g., cardiovascular diseases, infectious diseases, res-
piratory diseases). There are 30 students enrolled in this
course. Anonymous self-report questionnaires ask each stu-
dent to describe his/her motivation to learn in the four main
categories of the ARCS Model and are administered to the stu-
dents two weeks before the class begins. Students are urged to
respond candidly and honestly, informed that there are no right
or wrong answers, and that all responses are strictly confiden-
tial. This self-report measure will not affect the students’
grades or performance for the course. It is the intention of the
educator to get information from students for the purpose of
designing this course to meet students’ needs.
Step 1: Student analysis.
Attention(A) High. Students are very interested in taking
this class with the hope that this course will
help them to improve their clinical reasoning
skills.
Relevance(R) High. Students understand the relevance of
this course in its application to next year’s
Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experience
and their individual pharmacy career goals
(i.e., providing pharmaceutical care).
Confidence(C) Low to Moderate. Students’ beliefs in their
ability to employ sound clinical reasoning in
identifying and solving drug-related prob-
lems is low to moderate. Most of the stu-
dents share that they do not have much expe-
rience in clinical situations and fear being
too disorganized and lacking knowledge and
skills to solve patient problems. However,
most of them realize that confidence in the
ability to use cognitive skills is an important
quality for them to practice successfully
when they enroll in the Advanced Pharmacy
Practice Experience next year and when they
ultimately enter practice.
Satisfaction(S) High. Students find the course useful and
expect it will enable them to become effec-
tive practitioners. They expect that this
course will give them opportunities to
use/apply their knowledge and skills in real-
istic situations such as patient simulations, or
actual clinical case scenarios.
Step 2: Define motivational objectives based on the stu-
dent profile.
1. During the course of instruction, students will demonstrate
greater confidence in their ability to solve the problems
and employ sound clinical reasoning as the educator con-
tinues to illustrate the process of clinical reasoning using
the patient case scenario examples.
2. During the practice phase of the instruction and homework
assignments of the course, students will demonstrate
greater confidence in being able to successfully solve
actual case scenario problems through sound clinical rea-
soning. This can be further developed by increasing the
difficulty of the problems as the semester move forward.
3. Along with submitted homework assignments, students
will demonstrate increased level of confidence in their
ability to solve patient problems. The educator will pro
193
vide constructive feedback to help them develop reasonable
perceptions of their competence and foster the belief that
competence in clinical reasoning is a changeable, controllable
aspect of their development.
4. Within the last three recitation/discussion meetings, each
student will demonstrate greater confidence in his/her
ability to solve patient problems with sound clinical rea-
soning, when given the opportunity to create his/her own
case scenarios and then presenting them to fellow class-
mates.
Step 3: Design a motivational strategy for each motiva-
tional objective and integrate it into instruction.
1. Carefully plan presentation of the process of clinical rea-
soning based on the case examples to assist in building a
positive expectation for success among students.
(Strategy C.1)
2. Plan to develop case scenario homework assignments and
in-class practice exercises that provide the student with
challenging situations, some more ambiguous than others,
that mirror the “real world”. The assignments and exer-
cises will be purposely sequenced from simple to difficult.
This will help the students’ learning experience and
enhance the students’ beliefs in their competence.
(Strategy C.2)
3. Plan to create criteria for evaluating and grading home-
work assignments which are fair, valid and reliable. This
will help students clearly experience success based on
their effort and abilities. (Strategy C.3)
4. Create opportunities for students development of case sce-
narios that allow them to use their acquired knowledge and
skills in demonstrating their competence. (Strategy C.3)
Step 4: Develop, try out and revise the selected strategy as
necessary.
Because this is the first time the course has been offered, these
motivational strategies will be used as a try-out test.
Motivational measures developed based on the ARCS Model
will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the strategies. If
there are any strategies that fail to produce the intended results,
they will be revised and replaced for the future class. This step
should be implemented as soon as possible after the course
ends when thoughts/ideas are still fresh in one’s mind.
CONCLUSION
This paper has attempted to provide an overview of the ARCS
Model and a systematic approach of motivational design that
can be incorporated into one’s instruction. Pharmaceutical
educators should think about motivation in terms of four major
categories of influence on the motivation to learn, their subcat-
egories and motivational strategies. In the pharmaceutical care
era, teaching pharmacy students is a challenging and rewarding
experience. Pharmaceutical educators can teach, and teach
well, and still students might not learn if their hearts are not in
what we want them to learn. The result is that they may not use
and apply the knowledge and skills they have learned to pro-
vide pharmaceutical care, nor contribute a positive influence to
society, nor pursue the goal of life-long learning. As quoted
earlier, the 1984 Distinguished Pharmacy Educator and the
1979-1980 American Association of College of Pharmacy
194 American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Vol. 64, Summer 2000
(AACP) President Melvin R. Gibson(1) shared that even in the
largest of classes, educators always have the opportunity to
help “plant motivational seeds” to learn and nurture seeds
development through their instruction. Using motivational
design in creating motivational strategies helps pharmacy stu-
dents understand the importance of a lesson or instruction.
Motivational design and strategies should be embraced by
every pharmaceutical educator to enhance student learning and
achievement and skill development.
References
(1) Gibson, M.R., “Editorial,” Am. J. Pharm. Educ., 23, 286-287(1959).
(2) Pintrich, P.R. and Schunk, D.H., Motivation in education: Theory,
research, and applications. Merrill, Englewood Cliffs NJ (1996).
(3) Keller, J.M.,. “The systematic process of motivational design,”
Performance and Instruction. J., 1-8 (November/December 1987) .
(4) Yelon, S.L., Powerful Principles of Instruction. Longman, White Plains
NY (1996).
(5) Keller, J.M., “Motivation and instructional design: A theoretical perspec-
tive,” J. Instruct. Develop., 2(4), 26-34(1979).
(6) Keller, J.M., “Motivation design of instruction,” in Instructional-Design
Theories and Models: An Overview of Their Current Status, (edit.,
Reigeluth, C.M.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale NJ (1983) pp.
383-434.
(7) Keller, J.M., “Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn,”
Performance and Instruction. J., 1-7 (October 1987).
(8) Keller, J.M., “Development and use of the ARCS model of motivational
design,”J. Instruct. Develop., 10(3), 2-10(1987).
(9) Keller, J.M., “The use of the ARCS model of motivation in teacher train-
ing,” in Aspects of Educational Technology Volume XVII: Staff
Development and Career Updating, (edit.,Shaw, K.), Nichols, New York
NY(1984)pp.140-145.
(10) Visser, J. and Keller, J.M., “The clinical use of motivational message: An
inquiry into the validity of the ARCS model of motivational design,”
Instruct. Science., 19, 467-599(1990).
(11) Hepler, C.D. and Strand, L.M., “Opportunities and responsibilities in
pharmaceutical care,” Am. J. Hosp. Pharm., 47, 533-543(1990).
(12) Manasse, H.R., “Medication use in an imperfect world: Drug misadven-
turing as an issue of public health policy, Part I,” ibid.., 46, 929-
944(1989).
(13) Manasse, H.R., “Medication use in an imperfect world: Drug misadven-
turing as an issue of public health policy, part II,” ibid.., 46, 1141-
1152(1989).
(14) Johnson, J.A. and Bootman, J.L., “Drug-related morbidity and mortality,
a cost-of-illness model,” Arch. Intern. Med., 155, 1949-1956(1995).
(15) Burson, C.S., “ The value of pharmaceutical care services,” Pharmacist’s
Letter, 15, 67 (detail number 151201)(1999).
(16) Commission to Implement Change in Pharmaceutical Education,
“Background paper I: What is the mission of pharmaceutical educa-
tion?,” Am. J. Pharm. Educ., 57, 374-376(1993).
(17) Commission to Implement Change in Pharmaceutical Education,
“Background paper II: Entry-level, curricular outcomes, curricular con-
tent and educational process,” ibid.., 57, 377-384(1993).
(18) Keller, J.M. and Suzuki, K., “Use of the ARCS motivation model in
courseware design,” in Instructional Designs for Microcomputer
Courseware, (edit., Jonassen, D.H.) Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Hillsdale NJ (1988) pp. 401-434.
(19) Keller, J.M. and Kopp, T.W., “An application of the ARCS model of
motivational design,” in Instructional Theories in Action: Lessons
Illustrating Selected Theories and Models., (edit., Reigeluth CM),
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale NJ (1987) pp. 289-320.
(20) Keller, J.M., Development and use of the ARCS model of motivational
design. (Reports Research/Technical 143). East Lansing, MI: National
Center for Research on Teacher Learning. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 313 001)(1983).
(21) Keller, J.M., “ARCS Model modifications - January 20, 1991,” in
Foundations of Instructional Design Theory (EDCI674) Course Manual,
Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Purdue University, West
Lafayette IN (1998).
(22) Driscoll, M.P., Psychology of learning for instruction. Allyn & Bacon,
Boston MA (1994).
APPENDIX. MOTIVATIONAL CATEGORIES, SUBCATEGORIES, ASSOCIATED PROCESS QUESTIONS, AND
MOTIVATIONAL STRATEGIES FOR STIMULATING MOTIVATION AS SUGGESTED BY THE ARCS MODEL
Categories/Subcategories Process questions Motivational strategies
Attention (A)
A. 1. Perceptual arousal • What can I do to capture students’ • create curiosity by using novel approaches, injecting personal and/or
(i.e., capturing student interest emotional material
interest) • using animation, inverse, flash, sound and other audio and/or visual
capabilities of the audiovisual instruments
• using unusual, humor, contradictory, or bizarre content to stimulate
attention
• avoiding dysfunctional attention getting effects such as a flashing
word that distracts the student’s concentration
A.2. Inquiry arousal • How can I stimulate an attitude of • stimulate information-seeking behavior by presenting an unsolved
(i.e.., stimulating student inquiry? case, posing or having the student generate questions or provide
inquiry) problem solving opportunities that nurture active thinking challenges
A.3. Variability • How can I maintain students’ • maintain student attention by varying the elements of instruction (e.g.,
(i.e.., maintaining student attention? presentation style, using concrete analogies, human interest examples or
attention) unexpected events)
Relevance (R)
R.1. Goal orientation • How can I best meet my student’s • provide clear statements or examples that present the objectives and utility of
(i.e.., meeting student needs/goals? (DoI know their the instruction, and either present goals for their accomplishment or have the
needs/goals) needs?) student define them
R.2. Motive matching • How and when can I provide my • use teaching strategies that match the motivational profile of the students
(i.e.., matching student students with appropriate choices,
interests and learning responsibilities, and influences? • make instruction responsive to student motives and values by
styles) (How and when can I link my providing personal achievement opportunities or self-study,
instruction to the learning styles and cooperative activities, leadership responsibilities, and exposure to
personal interests of the students?) positive role models
R.3. Familiarity • How can I tie the instruction to the • make the materials and concepts familiar by providing or using
(i.e.., creating links to student’s experiences concrete language, examples, concepts, and analogies that are related to
student experiences) the student’s educational level experience and values
• learn and use the students’ names; request for experiences and ideas from
the students
Confidence (C)
C.1. Learning requirements • How can I assist in building a • gain the student’s trust and positive expectations by explaining the
(i.e., developing a positive positive expectation for success? prerequisite knowledge, skills, or attitudes that will help him/her
expectation for success) succed at the task
• clearly present or state the instructional goals, objectives, and the
overall structure of the lesson/course
• explain the evaluation criteria and provide opportunities for practice
with feedback without penalty
• tell the student how many items are going to be in a test or drill, and
whether it will be timed, this helps the student anticipate performance
requirements
• include statements about the likelihood of success with given amounts
of effort and ability; teach students how to develop a plan of work that
will result in goal accomplishment
• help students set realistic goals
C.2. Success opportunities • How will the learning experience • provide many, varied, and challenging experiences which increase
(i.e.., supporting or support enhance the students’ beliefs in their learning success as the course moves forward
or enhancing student’s belie competience? • organize materials and practice exercises on an increasing level of
in his/her competence) difficulty - that is structure the materials to provide a conquerable
challenge, over the course life
• match learning requirements to prerequisite knowledge and skills to
prevent excessive challence and anxiety for the less capable
students, or boredom for the more capable ones
• provide a pretest at the beginning of the instructional sequence. There
may be a wide variation in students’ entry level of knowledge

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Vol. 64, Summer 2000 195

Categories/Subcategories
C.3. Personal responsibility
(i.e.., establishing student’s
effort and ability as his/her
basis for success
Satisfaction (S)
S.1. Natural consequences
(i.e.., intrinsic
reinforcement)
S.2. Positive consequences
(i.e.., extrinsic rewards)
S.3. Equity
(i.e.., demonstrating fair
treatment among students)
Adapted from references 3,8,7,18,19,21
196
View publication stats
Process questions
• How will the students clearly know • allow students opportunity to become increasingly independent in
their success is based on their efforts learning and practicing a skill
and abilities?
• How can I provide meaningful
opportunities for students to use
their newly acquired knowledge
skills? (How can I encourage
and support their intrinsic enjoyment
of the learning experience?)
• What will provide rewarding
consequences to the student’s
successes?
• How can I build student perception
of fair treatment
(How can I assist the students in
anchoring a positive feeling about
their accomplishment?)
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Vol. 64, Summer 2000
Motivational strategies
• to help the student establish a personally meaningful level of
challenge and develop confidence and self-esteem, control difficulty
level by adding a time-limit, varying the speed of the stimulus and
response, or varying the complexity of the situation
• after students have achieved some degree of mastery of a skill or
knowledge areal, they are more likely to be stimulated by competition
and other sources of uncertainty. Insert random events as a means to
reinforce knowledge and skills and not ultimately override the
influences of skill performance during practice or application
• provide student feedback for acceptable responses as well as
constructive feedback for those responses that do not meet criteria
• have students learn new skills under low risk conditions, and continue
practice performance of well-learned tasks under realistic conditions
• help students understand that the pursuit of excellence does not mean
that anything short of perfection is a failure. Allow them to feel good
about genuine accomplishment
• provide attributional feedback that connects student success to
personal effort and ability rather than through pure luck or ease of task
when appropriate
• encourage student opportunities to verbalize appropriate attributions
for success and failures
• provide problems, simulations, or work samples that allow students to
realize they can solve “real world” problems
• provide students positive recognition by giving opportunities
to help others who have not yet mastered a task
• acknowledge student actions or characteristics that are necessary for
success, continue these acknowledgements of any risks or challenges
that are lmet
• nurture student motivation by informing students about areas of
related interest or application of concepts and how students might
continue to pursue to their interest in the topic
• use verbal praise, real or symbolic rewards, and incentives, or allow
students to showcase the results of their effort (“show and tell”) to
reward their success after instruction
• avoid diluting the motivational benefits of feedback (i.e.., providing
too much praise for a rather simple task) but use this frequently when
students are trying to master a new skill
• use extrinsic rewards for correct responses and do not chastise
students for wrong answers, help students understand mistakes as
learning opportunities
• use extrinsic rewards judiciously so that the rewards do not become
more interesting than the instruction itself
• use reinforcement intermittently as students become more
competent at a task and progress with the instruction
• make performance requirements consistent with stated expectations
objectives, and/or standards and provide consistent measurement
standards for all student’s tasks, tests, and accomplishments