TECHNOLOGY and
INTRINSIC MOTIVATION
Catherine J. Hammond
Liberty University
March 8, 2015
Abstract
Currently, a myriad of academics and researchers are looking at the
problem of motivating students to learn and to progress academically.
The major responsibility for motivating students has fallen on the
shoulders of educators, who are increasingly using technology as a
motivational tool. Some whole school systems are using technology in
the classrooms with teacher facilitators. This study will analyze what is
happening with student motivation in the midst of these technological
changes and whether or not it is affecting student intrinsic motivation.
Purpose
Correlations between motivation and technology usage are tied to student
emotion, choice and the type of technology used in the classroom among other
factors. Technology usage is being used as a tool for curriculum content but is
also simply available for student use. Some researchers report that technology
distracts students and lowers academic achievement. The results of studies thus
far have indicated that intrinsic motivation has not been singled out as something
which predicts successful technology usage in learning. This study will look at
student motivation and attempt to determine whether students are already
intrinsically motivated to succeed and the technologies are simply another student
curriculum tool or whether the new technologies are interfering with or increasing
student motivation.
Is the use of technologies in the classroom hindering or
encouraging the internalization of student motivation?
• Common sense tells us that motivation is a determining factor in
academic success but:
I.
How are students intrinsically motivated?
II.
Does technology affect student motivation?
• Are students using and excelling in the use of technologies
I.
II.
III.
Because they are already intrinsically motivated to learn?
Because they are new and fun and something other than classical
classroom curriculum?
Because there are extrinsic motivating factors attached to them, such
as rewards or consequences (grades, etc.).
Variables
Because this study will be qualitative in nature, the
variables used in the research will not be determined until
after the phenomenological research has been conducted
and students have been asked to describe their experiences
(Waters, n.d.).
A second follow-up qualitative study is proposed which will
take these variables and match them against participant
academic success (pre and post technology grades) and
various forms of technology usage.
Key Terms
Motivation is a drive that causes us to act or move toward a goal;
it is a process that “initiates, guides, and maintains” our behaviors
(Cherry, 2015).
Motivation is basically the drive to succeed. This drive can be
either intrinsic (autonomous) or (extrinsic) controlled by outer
forces (Mouratidis & Michau, p.67), depending on the situation
and maturity of the person involved.
Phenomenology is the goal of qualitative research in that it
attempts to discover individual lived experiences (Waters, n.d.)
Key Terms cont.
Technology is “a manner of accomplishing a task … using technical
processes, methods, or knowledge” (Merrian-Webster.com). Dictionary.com
describes technology as a “branch of knowledge that deals with the creation
and use of technical means and their interrelation with life, society, and the
environment”. In this case technology is connected to education.
E-learning is “electronic learning; the process of learning online, esp. via
the Internet and email” (Dictionary.com). This learning includes “types of
media that deliver text, audio, images, animation, and streaming video, and
includes technology applications and processes such as audio or video tape,
satellite TV, CD-ROM, and computer-based learning, as well as local
intranet/extranet and web-based learning.” (Tavangarian et al, 2004).
Key Terms cont.
Mobile Technology / Device is any device that allows “people to access
data and information from where ever they are” (Bucki, 2015).
Interactive learning environments are educational environments in
which students are engaged in learning by the use of technology, such as
online coursework, virtual classrooms in which students interact with other
students or each other over distance, through various types of mobile media,
through online coursework, etc. It is sometimes referred to as ‘e-learning.
Virtual Reality: According to Dictionnary.com this occurs in an
environment where there is a realistic simulation of something by the use of
“three-dimensional graphics, by a computer system using interactive software
and hardware” (Dictionary.com).
Review of Literature
Various forms of technology have become educational staples in classrooms. How do
these classroom changes affect student motivation? Are the changes positive or
negative? The literature seems to support both.
MOTIVATION
According to Cantley, Mouratidis & Mouchou and Malone & Lepper, the levels of
intrinsic (self-directed) motivation are a predictor of student achievement (2005). This
refers to students who achieve simply because it is enjoyable or important to them
(Mouratidis and Micho, 2011) or to receive reward or avoid consequences (Cherry,
2015a). Ciampa believes that extrinsic motivation should be considered when using
technology for instruction, though intrinsic motivation is the goal (2014).Does the use
of technology support, increase or decrease this?
Review of Literature
Technological Games in Curriculum
A study in Turkey found that new 3D game technologies elicit better student responses than
older format educational games (Tuzun, 2009). Bowers and Berland (2013) studied the
recreational use of computers and their effects on student achievement. The study did not
establish a connection with academic achievement and one might question whether the higher
achieving gamers were already intrinsically motivated. A third study focused on using
TimezAttack to teach math (Jones, 2011) and found student interest increased but no discernable
increase in academic achievement in word problems. Question: was learning increase simply
rote and not transferable to solving word problems? A Fourth study used Alien Rescue to teach
astronomy (Liu, 2005). Author found an increase in students challenged and “intrinsic goal
orientation” (2005) were results of game use. Overall, the use of technology in these studies
caused increase in student interest but an indefinable increase in academic achievement (Tuzun,
2009; Bowers and Berand, 2013; Jones, 2011.). Question: does NEW technology increase
student interest and motivation to learn?
Review of Literature
Technology Increases Student Optimism and Motivation
A doctoral study relating technology, student performance and motivation in
higher education looked at introducing a technology component in order to free
professors for more student interaction. The study found significance in student
optimism increases which led to increased motivation (Lang, 2004).
Ciampa looked at the issue of laptops in a 6th grade classroom. This study found
that technology usage resulted in producing extrinsic factors including
challenging students, immediate feedback of assignments and activities, student
collaboration and teamwork (2014). Ciampa believes that we should use both
extrinsic and intrinsic motivators to encourage academic achievement (2014).
Review of Literature
Classroom Technology Hinders Academics
A Canadian study conducted by Gaudreau, Miranda & Gareau scrutinized 1129 university
students for academic vs. non-academic usage of mobile technology in classrooms. Students
were using them to multi-task - for both curriculum and non-curriculum related purposes. There
was no measurement evaluating the type of computer usage other than student reporting; there
was no way to measure intrinsic motivation of students during this technology usage.
A related study, while looking at multi-tasking with technology in the classroom, found these
behaviors to be negative both for the muti-tasker as well as bystanders (Sana, Weston & Cepeda,
2012). Test scores were lower for both the multi-taskers and the bystanders. This study included
two phases with control groups and the results indicated that the multi-taskers were not
intrinsically motivated students and the technology pulled them off course (2012). This coincides
with a study by Juno linking deficits in academic performance to student-owned technology and
multi-tasking in the classroom ( 2012).
Review of Literature
Summary
These reports touch on relating technology to motivation, in particular intrinsic
or autonomous motivation. The general consensus seems to indicate that when
technology is used as a targeted curriculum tool, it is successful in motivating
students – for various reasons. When technology is simply available or students
bring technology into the classroom environment they are often distracted by
multi-tasking, a behavior which seems to be a hindering factor in academic
achievement, particularly if the student is not intrinsically or self-motivated.
This author has not unearthed any studies which directly correlate intrinsic
motivation and the use of technology as a learning tool. Question: Does
technology really have any effect on intrinsic motivation?
Research Design
The research design of choice for this study would be a multiple
approach. First the assessment would be qualitative.
Phenomenological information would be assessed from interviews
of educators in classrooms where technology is used, both school
provided and student personal technologies. Next, the variables
would be determined and a narrower focus would be determined and
studied using quantitative methods (variable types, technology and
Motivation. depending on the qualitative study results).
Sampling
The sampling for this study would be confined to classrooms which
are engaged in using technology as part of the curriculum. This
would include personal student technology or the use of school or
district supplied technology for the student body. In order to see over
what is happening with technology in American schools a cross-section
of classes in various venues would be the desired sampling – to include
rural, urban, and private schools.
Primarily this study would focus on high school level classrooms
which typically include students who should developmentally
be intrinsically motivated much more frequently than elementary
level students.
Methods of Data Collection
Because this is a qualitative study the variables are not really defined as yet.
They will be determined as the data comes in and categories start to
emerge.
1. Open-ended, group interviews focused on the area of classroom
technology usage.
2. Interviews in the form of randomly selected personal interviews.
**All interviews will be recorded for purposes of data accuracy
Data Analysis Procedures
Group Interviews
Data will be categorized by:
 Group participation by age, sex, etc.
 Students who use technology in classroom – personal vs. schoolprovided technology.
 Bystanders who participation with those who have technology.
 Technology for curriculum usage vs. technology for non-curriculum
usage.
 Any other emerging themes
Data Analysis Procedures
Personal interviews
Student interviews: Coded according to technology usage for curriculum purposes and
for extra-curricular purposes.
Educator interviews: Anecdotal information related to students in individual interviews
will be coded and related to the particular participants.
All data will then be analyzed for causation factors, variation items and any
motivational issues which arise.
Motivational issues will have been coded and categorized according to levels of
situational motivation as depicted in the SIMS model - used to measure various
levels of self-determination theory. (Guay, Vallerand & Blanchard, 2000).
Interpretational analysis will occur and give a picture of any gaps and direct future
quantitative study.
Data Analysis Procedures
Validity Concerns
There may be concerns about the validity of this study due to
personal responses in the interviews:
The age of participants and maturity level will determine the
veracity or accuracy of student responses and this must be taken
into account when analyzing the individual interviews. This may
also be an issue when students are interviewed in group settings,
where there is often a tendency for adolescent group dynamics to
occur.
Ethics and Human Relations

An audit or running log will be kept of all procedures will be kept during the study
process.

Parents will be given a permission slip to signify that they allow their child/children to
participate in the face-to-face interviews.

Supporting, general interviews by school administrators – generally about the
technology program in their institution.

Individual interview responses will be coded by number in lieu of student names – group
interviews will be coded by school and particular curriculum content area and male or
female responses.

Student interviews will be attached to their curriculum educators by number. This will
be done for various reasons, especially important IF the type of curriculum content
becomes a factor in this study.

The study will be constantly audited for researcher bias.
Timeline (per school studied)
1 month: to research schools for participation in this study,
2 months: preparation for the study
• Approach schools and teachers to elicit participation in the study.
• Once enlistment is guaranteed, parental permission slips will be
disseminated to the various related participants.
• Arrange all particulars related to the on-site interviews.
1-2 weeks: (depending on participant schedules): conduct student, educator
and administrative interviews.
3 weeks: analysis of data and complete findings.
1 MONTH
2 MONTHS
1-2 WEEKS
3 WEEKS
References
Bartle, R. (2003). Designing virtual worlds. New Riders. ISBN 0-13-1018167. Retrieved from
http://www.ask.com/wiki/Virtual_world?lang=en#cite_note-Bartle2003-Designing-1
Bowers, A. J., & Berland, M. (2013). Does recreational computer use affect high school
achievement? Educational Technology, Research and Development, 61(1), 51-69.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9274-1
Bucki, J. (2015). Definition of Mobile Device. About Money: About.com. Retrieved from
http://operationstech.about.com/od/glossary/g/Definition-Of-Mobile-Device.htm
Cantley, C. (2005). Predicting academic intrinsic motivation: The role of parents, teachers, and
child factors. St. John's University (New York), ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing,
2005. 3196296.
Cherry, K. (2015a). What is intrinsic motivation? About Education. Retrieved from
http://psychology.about.com/od/motivation/f/intrinsic-motivation.htm
Cherry, K. (2015b). The difference between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. About Education.
Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/od/motivation/f/difference-between-extrinsicand-intrinsic-motivation.htm
Ciampa, K. (2014), Learning in a mobile age: an investigation of student motivation. Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning, 30, 82–96. doi:10.1111/jcal.12036. Retrieved from
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/doi/10.1111/jcal.12036/abstract
References Cont.
Crescente, M.L., Lee, D. (2011). Critical issues of m-learning: design models, adoption processes,
and future trends. Journal of the Chinese Institute of Industrial Engineers 28(2), 111–123.
Doi:10.1080/10170669.2010.548856.
Crompton, H. (2013). A historical overview of mobile learning: Toward learner-centered
education. In Z. L. Berge & L. Y. Muilenburg (Eds.), Handbook of mobile learning, 3–14.
Retrieved from http://www.ask.com/wiki/M-learning?qsrc=3044&lang=en#cite_note-1
El-Wazir, Y., Hosny, S. and Farouk, O. (2011). Revitalizing student motivation in problem-based
learning with computer enhancement. Medical Education, 45: 511. doi: 10.1111/j.13652923.2011.03970.x
Gaudreau, P., Miranda, D., & Gareau, A. (2014). Canadian university students in wireless
classrooms: What do they do on their laptops and does it really matter? Computers &
Education 70, 245-255. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.019.
Granito, M. and Chernobilsky, E., “The Effect of Technology on a Student's Motivation and
Knowledge Retention" (2012). NERA Conference Proceedings 2012. Paper 17
Guay, F; Vallerand, R; Blanchard, C. (2000). On the assessment of situational intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation: The situational motivation scale (SIMS). Motivation & Emotion 24(3),
p175. Retrieved from http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/11307516/assessmentsituational-intrinsic-extrinsic-motivation-situational-motivation-scale-sims
References Cont.
internalization. (n.d.). The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary. Retrieved February
24, 2015, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/internalization
Jones, V. C. (2011). The effects of computer gaming on student motivation and basic multiplication
fluency (Order No. 3484339). Available from ProQuest Central; ProQuest Dissertations &
Theses Full Text; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global; ProQuest Social Sciences
Premium Collection. (903799671). Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/903799671?accountid=12085
Lang, T. K. (2004). The effect of learning styles, computer attitude, and classroom technology on
student performance and motivation (Order No. 3154823). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Full Text; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (305214853).
Liu, M. (2005). The effect of a hypermedia learning environment on middle school students'
motivation, attitude, and science knowledge. Computers in the Schools, 22(3), 159-171.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J025v22n03_13
Lefstein, A., & Snell, J. (2011). Promises and problems of teaching with popular culture: a
linguistic ethnographic analysis of discourse genre mixing in a literacy lesson. Reading
Research Quarterly, 46(1), 40-69. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Mouratidis, A., & Michou, A. (2011). Self-Determined motivation and social achievement goals in
children's emotions. Educational Psychology, 31(1), 67-86. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
References Cont.
Osborne, Jason W., Jones, Brett. (2011). Identification with academics and motivation to achieve in
school: How the structure of the self influences academic outcomes. Educational Psychology
Review, 23(1), 131-158. Retrieved from http://www.Springerlink.com.ezproy.liberty.edu
Richey, R.C. (2008). Reflections on the 2008 AECT. Definitions of the Field. TechTrends. 52(1)
24-25. Retrieved from http://www.ask.com/wiki/Educational_technology?lang=en#cite_noteRichey2008-1
Sana, F., Weston, T., & Cepeda, N.J. (2012). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for
both users and nearby peers. Computers & Education, 62:24-31. Retrieved from
http://www.scciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131512002254.
Story, N.O., and Sullivan H.J. (1986). Factors that influence continuing motivation. The Journal of
Educational Research, 80(2), 86-92 retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40639615
Tavangarian D., Leypold M., Nölting K., Röser M.,(2004). Is e-learning the solution for individual
learning? Retrieved from http://www.ask.com/web?qsrc=1&o=0&l=dir&q=Is+elearning+the+Solution+for+Individual+Learning%3F+&qo=serpSearchTopBox
technology [Def. 2]. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster Online. Retrieved March 9, 2015 from
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/technology
References Cont.
technology [Def. 1]. (n.d.). In Dictionary.com. Retrieved Marcy 9, 2015 from
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/technology
Tuzun, H., Yilmaz-Soylu, M., Karakus, T., Inal, Y., and Zizilkaya, G. (2009). The effects of
computer games on primary school students' achievement and motivation in geography
learning. Computers & Education, 52(1), 68-77. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/science/article/pii/S036013150800098
5
ALL clipart from Images at Google.com