Describe why learning and motivation theory would be important to consider when planning a performance improvement intervention. Support your answer
The learning and motivation theories are taken into account by the majority of educators who plan the implementation of the performance improvement intervention. The reason is in the fact that the performance improvement intervention is based on stimulating the desirable changes in students’ behaviors and outcomes. However, the intervention directed to improving the performance can have different effects on students, depending on their motivation and learning styles (Wendt & Evers, 2014). In order to choose or plan the most effective performance improvement intervention, it is necessary to analyze the students’ characteristics and explain their behaviors in the context of the learning and motivation theories.
The learning theories allow educators to evaluate the students’ approaches to the studying process. Before planning, developing, and implementing the intervention to affect the students’ performance, it is necessary to conclude regarding their age, skills, prior experiences, learning styles, interests, cultures, and visions. Thus, the performance improvement intervention can be based on the principles of the Adult Learning Theory, for instance. In this case, students who study in colleges and universities are perceived as adults who are good at self-management and self-control, and they are ready to make efforts in order to succeed in the study because they have certain learning goals (Gatti-Petito, Lakatos, Bradley, Cook, & Haight, 2013). The focus is also on the students’ previous experiences and developed skills that serve as the background for the further improvement of the performance. On the contrary, while applying the Social Learning Theory, it is possible to present the intervention in the form of the contest where students should work to improve their performance and receive certain rewards. The intervention can have significant positive effects because it is based on the idea that people learn while following the models and behaviors typical of other persons (Onyon, 2012). As a result, the contest can stimulate the students’ learning from each other.
Similar principles can be taken into account while applying the motivational theories in order to provide the basis for the performance improvement intervention. It is important to pay attention to the fact that motivational theories are based on learning theories, or, in their turn, learning theories are originated from motivational ones. While speaking about the role of motivational theories in this process, it is important to note that these theories explain how this or that strategy, tool, or reinforcer can be perceived by a student. The students’ motivation is an important aspect that makes the person improve the behavior and performance, work hard, and try to achieve the goal (Craddock, O’Halloran, McPherson, Hean, & Hammick, 2013). Those educators who refer to motivational theories while planning the intervention should succeed in selecting the motivator that can be used most effectively in order to promote the students’ learning and improve performance.
In order to expect positive and high results while implementing the intervention, educators need to apply extrinsic and intrinsic motivators or reinforcers in order to stimulate certain behavior or activity in students. The extrinsic motivation to improve the performance depends on the understanding of rewards that students can have after changing the behavior. Intrinsic motivation depends on the self-efficacy and affective components (Wendt & Evers, 2014). Still, this approach to motivate students to perform better is even more effective than the use of extrinsic motivators. From this point, it is possible to state that the learning and motivation theories are used in order to explain how the student can be stimulated to improve the performance.
What are needs or performance analyses and why is it important for an instructional designer to conduct one prior to planning instruction? What is the final outcome of a needs/performance analysis? What are some popular approaches to needs/performance analysis? How are they similar and how are theythey different?
The performance analysis is a procedure that is used by educators in order to determine what areas of the students’ knowledge or skills should be improved with the help of training or other interventions. It is possible to state that the needs analysis has high importance for an instructional designer because it is almost impossible to start developing the curriculum, schedule, plan, or strategy without understanding at which learning process milestone students are now. Before planning and developing the instruction and possible interventions, it is necessary to conduct the performance assessment in order to determine the character and the level of the skills’ development, students’ strengths and weaknesses, as well as possible gaps in understanding the material (Ragan & Smith, 2004). When instructional designers do not perform the analysis before proposing the new approaches, models, and strategies to be applied in the educational process, they cannot move to the second step in the process of creating the educational program or curriculum.
While speaking about the outcome of this procedure, it is possible to refer to the clear understanding of the students’ needs and gaps in their knowledge regarding certain areas. The analysis allows identifying the strengths and weaknesses in the students’ performance in order to state what areas require improvement and what aspects of the students’ learning should be monitored (Crawford, 2004). From this point, the outcome of the procedure influences the quality of the proposed program directly. Therefore, much attention should be paid to models that are used by instructional designers in order to create the most appropriate or efficient plan and program to address the students’ needs and cover the identified gaps.
The approaches to designing the needs analysis, which was proposed by such researchers as Mager and Rossett, as well as by Ragan and Smith, and by Ross, Morrison, and Lowther, in their turn, are discussed as traditional models that are currently used by educators and instructional designers in their practice. These approaches are rather similar, in spite of having certain different features. Similarities are observed because the authors propose several basic actions to take. They recommend identifying instructional problems, study characteristics of students, focus on the content of the learning material, conclude about the objectives and their achievements, plan the strategies to address the problems, and choose the resources and tools that can be used in order to overcome the identified issues (Ross, Morrison, & Lowther, 2010). However, the number of steps in this process is different for the models proposed by Morrison, Ross, and Kemp, and Mager, for instance.
If Ross, Morrison, and Lowther identify only nine steps in order to conduct the needs analysis, Mager proposes to use twelve detailed steps (Crawford, 2004; Ross et al., 2010). In their turn, Ragan and Smith (2004) did not focus on the detailed description of steps, but they accentuated the role of the analysis and evaluation in their model in order to propose the most effective discussion of the performance and associated gaps. In the 1980s, Rossett developed the model while naming the monitoring of the changes among other important aspects that add to the analysis of weaknesses and the evaluation of current needs (Rossett, Douglis, & Frazee, 2003). The discussed models are important to be followed while proposing the new educational program, training, or course.
References
Craddock, D., O’Halloran, C., McPherson, K., Hean, S., & Hammick, M. (2013). A top-down approach impedes the use of theory? Interprofessional educational leaders’ approaches to curriculum development and the use of learning theory. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 27(1), 65-72.
Crawford, C. (2004). Non‐linear instructional design model: Eternal, synergistic design and development. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 413-420.
Gatti-Petito, J., Lakatos, B. E., Bradley, H. B., Cook, L., & Haight, I. E. (2013). Clinical scholarship and adult learning theory: A role for the DNP in nursing education. Nursing Education Perspectives, 34(4), 273-276.
Onyon, C. (2012). Problem‐based learning: A review of the educational and psychological theory. The Clinical Teacher, 9(1), 22-26.
Ragan, T. J., & Smith, P. L. (2004). Conditions theory and models for designing instruction. Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 1(1), 623-649.
Ross, S. M., Morrison, G. R., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Educational technology research past and present: balancing rigor and relevance to impact school learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(1), 17-35.
Rossett, A., Douglis, F., & Frazee, R. V. (2003). Strategies for building blended learning. Learning Circuits, 4(7), 1-8.
Wendt, J. T., & Evers, S. G. (2014). Incorporating adult learning theory into law classrooms: Using a local high profile case to engage students. Business Journal for Entrepreneurs, 2014(1), 12-23.