Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Requirements and benefits of effective interactive instruction: Learner control, self-regulation, and continuing motivation

  • Research
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While educational technologies provide increasing opportunities for interactive exploration in a learning environment, crucial questions remain: Will learners be able to exercise control and effectively regulate their own learning in flexible learning systems? Will they be motivated enough really to explore? Theory and research suggest that learners can and will, if the instructional systems are well-designed and if the learners are adequately prepared. In this paper, the components of learner control, self-regulated learning, and continuing motivation are examined as possible requirements and benefits of effective interactive instruction. A theoretical framework is advanced which illustrates the interdependence and mutual importance of these three components. Educational research in each of these three areas is analyzed, inconsistencies are discussed, and further support is developed for consideration of these components within an instructional situation. Finally, recommendations are offered for future research, to develop further what we know about what makes instruction effective and learners successful.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ames, C. (1987). The enhancement of student motivation. In M. L. Maehr and D. A. Kleiber (Eds.),Advances in motivation and achievement: Vol. 5. Enhancing motivation. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arlin, M., & Whitley, T. W. (1978). Perceptions of self-managed learning opportunities and academic locus of control: A causal interpretation.Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 988–992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, A. M. (1989). The development of self-regulation skills through the modeling and structuring of computer programming.Educational Technology Research & Development, 37(2), 69–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, R. C. (1972). Optimizing the learning of a second-language vocabulary.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 96, 124–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baird, J. R., & White, R. T. (1982). Promoting self-control of learning.Instructional Science, 11, 227–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1982). The self and mechanisms of agency. In J. Suls (Ed.),Psychological perspectives on the self. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bobrow, S. A., & Bower, G. H. (1969). Comprehension and recall of sentences.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 80, 455–461.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, J. (1983). Conceptualizing student motivation.Educational Psychologist, 18, 200–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (1966).Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campanizzi, J. (1978). The effects of locus-of-control and provision of overviews upon response latency and achievement in a computer-assisted instructional sequence.Dissertation Abstracts International, 39(2-A) 830A. (University Microfilms No. 78-12, 325)

  • Campbell, V. N. (1964). Self-direction and programmed instruction for five different types of learning objectives.Psychology in the Schools, 1, 348–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, V. N., & Chapman, M. A. (1967). Learner control vs. program control of instruction.Psychology in the Schools, 4, 121–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, C. A. (1984). Do learners make good choices?Instructional Innovator, 29(2), 15–17, 48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, C. A., & Williams, M. D. (1988). A test of one learner-control strategy with students of differing levels of task persistence.American Educational Research Journal, 25, 285–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, C. A., Davidson, G. V., Williams, M. D., & Kalweit, C. M. (1986). Instructional options and encouragement effects in a microcomputer-delivered concept lesson.Journal of Educational Research, 79, 222–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. (1984). Research on student thought processes during computer-based instruction.Journal of Instructional Development, 7(3), 2–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condry, J., & Chambers, J. (1978). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning. In M. R. Lepper and D. Greene (Eds.),The hidden costs of reward: New perspectives on the psychology of human motivation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. B. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation.Educational Psychologist, 18, 88–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crandall, V. J., Katkovsky, W., & Preston, A. (1962). Motivational and ability determinants of young children's intellectual achievement behaviors.Child Development, 33, 643–661.

    Google Scholar 

  • deCharms, R. (1968).Personal causation. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L. (1975).Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiderio, J. (1988). A grand vision.BYTE, 13(10), 237–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Findley, M. J., & Cooper, H. M. (1983). Locus of control and academic achievement: A literature review.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 419–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, M. D., Blackwell, L. R., Garcia, A. B., & Greene, J. C. (1975). Effects of student control and choice on engagement in aCai arithmetic task in a low-income school.Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 776–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gay, G. (1986). Interaction of learner control and prior understanding in computer-assisted video instruction.Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 225–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, S. H. (1987). The effect of sequence control on computer assisted learning.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 14, 54–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greiner, J. M., & Karoly, P. (1976). Effects of self-control training on study activity and academic performance: An analysis of self-monitoring, self-reward, and systematic-planning components.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 23, 495–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, J. B. (1974). Effects of feedback, learner control, and cognitive abilities on state anxiety and performance in a computer-assisted instruction task.Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 247–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harter, S., & Connell, J. P. (1984). A model of children's achievement and related self-perceptions of competence, control, and motivational orientation. In J. Nicholls and M. Maehr (Eds.),Advances in motivation and achievement: Vol. 3. The development of achievement motivation. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herndon, J. N. (1987). Learner interests, achievement, and continuing motivation in instruction.Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 11–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurlock, R. E., Lahey, G. F., & McCann, P. H. (1974, April).Student controlled versus program controlled Cai. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 089 681).

  • Jacobsen, E., & Thompson, M. (1975, April).Self-managed learning using Cai. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, D.C. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 104 362).

  • Kehoe, J. F. (1979). Choice time and aspects of choice alternatives. In L. C. Perlmuter and R. A. Monty (Eds.),Choice and perceived control (pp. 67–82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design and instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 383–434). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinzie, M. B., & Sullivan, H. J. (1989b). ContinuingMotivational and achievement effects of learner control of computer-assisted instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

  • Kinzie, M. B., & Sullivan, H. J. (1989b) Continuing motivation, learner control, and CAI.Educational Technology Research & Development, 37(2), 5–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinzie, M. B., Sullivan, H. J., & Berdel, R. L. (1988). Learner control and achievement in science computer-assisted instruction.Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 299–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langer, E. J., & Rodin, J. (1976). The effects of choice and enhanced personal responsibility for the aged: A field experiment in an institutional setting.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 191–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepper, M. R. (1985). Microcomputers in education: Motivational and social issues.American Psychologist, 40(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lepper, M. R., & Chabay, R. W. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and instruction: Conflicting views on the role of the motivational processes in computer-based education.Educational Psychologist, 20, 217–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maehr, M. L. (1976). Continuing motivation: An analysis of a seldom considered educational outcome.Review of Educational Research, 46, 443–462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mager, R. F. (1964). Learner-controlled instruction—1958–1964.Programmed Instruction, 4(2), 1, 8, 10–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone, T. W. (1981). Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction.Cognitive Science, 4, 333–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCombs, B. L. (1982–3). Learner satisfaction, motivation, and performance: Capitalizing on strategies for positive self-control.Performance and Instruction, 21(4), 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCombs, B. L. (1984). Processes and skills underlying continuing intrinsic motivation to learn: Toward a definition of motivational skills training interventions.Educational Psychologist, 19, 199–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (1975). Learner control: Beyond aptitude-treatment interactions.AV Communications Review, 23, 217–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (1980). Learner control in computer based learning.Computers & Education, 4, 77–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milheim, W. D., & Azbell, J. W. (1988, January).How past research on learner control can aid in the design of interactive video materials. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, New Orleans.

  • Newman, S. E. (1957). Student vs. instructor design of study method.Journal of Educational Psychology, 48, 328–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pascal, C. E. (1971). Instructional options, option preference, and course outcomes.The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 17(1), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlmuter, L. C., & Monty, R. A. (1977). The importance of perceived control: Fact or fantasy?American Scientist, 65, 759–765.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1952).The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B. (1972). Open education: Some tasks for technology.Educational Technology, 12(1), 70–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodin, J., & Langer, E. (1977). Long-term effects of a control-relevant intervention with the institutionalized aged.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 897–902.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodin, J., Solomon, S. K., & Metcalf, J. (1978). Role of control in mediating perceptions of density.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 988–999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. M., & Rakow, E. A. (1980). Adaptive design strategies for the teacher-managed course.Journal of Instructional Psychology, 7(1), 13–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. M., McCormick, D., & Krisak, N. (1986). Adapting the thematic context of mathematical problems to student interests: Individual versus group-based strategies.Journal of Educational Research, 79, 245–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. M., & Morrison, G. R. (1989). In search of a happy medium in instructional technology research: Issues concerning external validity, media replications, and learner control.Educational Technology Research & Development, 37, 19–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. M., Morrison, G. R., & O'Dell, J. K. (1988). Obtaining more out of less text inCbi: Effects of varied text density levels as a function of learner characteristics and control strategy.Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 36, 131–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement.Psychological Monographs, 80 (Whole No. 69), 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G., & Garner, H. (1986). The computer as educator: Lessons from television research.Educational Researcher, 15(1), 13–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, R. (1976). Effects of control and predictability on the physical and psychological well-being of the institutionalized aged.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 563–573.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, R., & Hanusa, B. H. (1978). Long-term effects of control and predictability-enhancing interventions: Findings and ethical issues.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1,194–1,201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H., & Rice, J. M. (1987). Enhancing comprehension skill and self-efficacy with strategy value information.Journal of Reading Behavior, 19, 285–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherrod, D. R., Hage, J. N., Halpern, P. L., & Moore, B. S. (1977). Effects of personal causation and perceived control on responses to an aversive environment: The more control, the better.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 14–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, R. E. (1980). Aptitude, learner control, and adaptive instruction.Educational Psychologist, 15, 151–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, E. R., Baskin, A. B., & Hofer, E. (1986). Organizational/memory tools: A technique for improving problem solving skills.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2, 169–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stipek, D. J., & Weisz, J. R. (1981). Perceived control and academic achievement.Review of Educational Research, 51, 101–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stotland, E., & Blumenthal, A. L. (1964). The reduction of anxiety as a result of the expectation of making a choice.Canadian Journal of Psychology, 18, 139–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R. D. (1980). Instructional control strategies and content structure as design variables in concept acquisition using computer-based instruction.Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 525–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R. D. (1981). Use of adaptive information for advisement in learning concepts and rules using computer-assisted instruction.American Educational Research Journal, 18, 425–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R. D., & Buttrey, T. (1980). Advisement and management strategies as design variables in computer-assisted instruction.Educational Communication & Technology Journal, 28, 169–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, R. D., & Rothen, W. (1979). Management of computer-based instruction: Design of an adaptive control strategy.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 5, 63–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M. C. (1983). Development and consequences of students' sense of personal control. In J. M. Levine and M. C. Wang (Eds.),Teacher and student perceptions: Implications for learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M. C., & Stiles, B. (1976). An investigation of children's concept of self-responsibility for their school learning.American Educational Research Journal, 13, 159–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence.Psychological Review, 66, 297–333.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the Department of Educational Studies, Curry School of Education, The University of Virginia, 22903-2495, Charlottesville, VA

    Mable B. Kinzie

Authors
  1. Mable B. Kinzie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The author wishes to thank Richard Berdel, Craig Locatis, and theETR&D reviewers for their comments on a draft of this article.

Editor's Note: This article is the award-winning manuscript for the 1990ETR&D Young Scholar Award, sponsored by the ECT Foundation. Dr. Kinzie was selected as the winner based on reviews and ratings by theETR&D Research Board from the manuscripts submitted for the award competition.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kinzie, M.B. Requirements and benefits of effective interactive instruction: Learner control, self-regulation, and continuing motivation. ETR&D 38, 5–21 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02298244

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02298244

Keywords

Search

Navigation