Effects of the ARCS Instructional Model on Undergraduate Students’ Motivation and Learning Outcomes in an Online Basic Physics Course

Dimas Permadi; Hanifah Zakiya; Chika Rahayu

doi:10.22373/

Authors

Dimas Permadi Physics Education, Lampung University, Bandar Lampung, Indonesia
Hanifah Zakiya Physics Education, Lampung University, Bandar Lampung, Indonesia
Chika Rahayu Mathematics Education, Lampung University, Bandar Lampung, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22373/

Keywords:

ARCS, Learning Motivation, Learning Outcomes

Abstract

This study investigates the effectiveness of the ARCS motivational model (Attention, Relevance, Confidence, Satisfaction) in improving undergraduate students’ motivation and learning outcomes in an online Basic Physics course. A one‑shot case study design was employed with a single cohort of students (n = 37). Learning motivation was measured using a validated ARCS‑based questionnaire, while learning outcomes were assessed through a post‑test aligned with four Sub‑CPMK indicators. Descriptive statistics and the Wilcoxon signed‑rank test were used to analyze the data. The Wilcoxon test compared students’ post‑test scores against the predetermined minimum competency standard (KKM = 70). Results showed generally high levels of motivation across most indicators (61.95%–80.26%), although engaging learning activities fell within the moderate category (53.78%). Learning outcomes varied substantially, with the highest performance recorded in Sub‑CPMK 3 (analyzing motion through data, graphs, and equations) at 83.2%, and the lowest in Sub‑CPMK 2 (vector analysis and dipole moment concepts) at 14.6%. The Wilcoxon signed‑rank test yielded a significant result (p = 0.000), indicating that student performance significantly exceeded the KKM benchmark. These findings suggest that the ARCS model effectively enhances motivation and conceptual understanding, particularly for visually representable content, while highlighting the need for additional instructional scaffolding (e.g., progressive visual support and guided practice) to improve learning of abstract concepts such as vectors and dipole moments. Future research is recommended to employ stronger experimental controls (e.g., pretest‑posttest control group designs) and item‑level analyses to further validate the applicability of the ARCS model in online physics education.

References

Afjar, A. M., Musri, & Syukr, M. (2020). Attention , relevance , confidence , satisfaction ( ARCS ) model on students ’ motivation and learning outcomes in learning physics Attention , relevance , confidence , satisfaction ( ARCS ) model on students ’ motivation and learning outcomes in learning. IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1460/1/012119

Anto, A. R., Firdaus, T., & Sinensis, A. R. (2022). LABORATORIUM VIRTUAL ( PhET SIMULATION ): PENINGKATAN KEMAMPUAN ANALISIS SISWA PADA MATERI. U-Teach: Journal Education of Young Physics Teacher, 2(2), 73–77.

Betari, A., Hasanati, A., Fuadah, F., Amir, M. T., & Parno, P. (2021). Students ’ Learning Motivation through the Quality of Scientific Argumentation Skills and Students ’ Cognitive Learning Outcomes on Newton ’ s Laws : A Relationship Analysis, 10(1), 71–84. https://doi.org/10.24042/jipfalbiruni.v10i1.7642

Brahmia, S. W., Olsho, A., Smith, T. I., Boudreaux, A., Eaton, P., & Zimmerman, C. (2021). Physics Inventory of Quantitative Literacy : A tool for assessing mathematical reasoning in introductory physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(2), 20129. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020129

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “ What ” and “ Why ” of Goal Pursuits : Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior, 11(4), 227–268.

Doo, M. Y., Bonk, C. J., & Heo, H. (2020). A Meta-Analysis of Scaffolding Effects in Online Learning in Higher Education, 21(3).

Edelsbrunner, P. A., Malone, S., Hofer, S. I., Küchemann, S., Kuhn, J., Schmid, R., … Lichtenberger, A. (2023). The relation of representational competence and conceptual knowledge in female and male undergraduates. International Journal of STEM Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00435-6

Evagorou, M., Erduran, S., & Mäntylä, T. (2015). The role of visual representations in scientific practices : from conceptual understanding and knowledge generation to ‘ seeing ’ how science works. International Journal of STEM Education, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0024-x

Fang, X., Tsz, D., Ng, K., Ka, J., Leung, L., Xu, H., … Ng, K. (2024). The applications of the ARCS model in instructional design , theoretical framework , and measurement tool : a systematic review of empirical studies, 4820. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2240867

Ignacio, L., Franco, E., Maurelos-castell, P., Mart, E., & Montes, V. (2021). education sciences University Students ’ Experiences of the Use of Mlearning as a Training Resource for the Acquisition of Biomechanical Knowledge.

Jane, K. (2026). Representational competence and conceptual understanding in linear motion: differences by representation type and gender. Magister Scientiae, 54(1), 37–52.

Maiti, M., Priyaadharshini, M., & Harini, S. (2023). Heliyon Design and evaluation of a revised ARCS motivational model for online classes in higher education. Heliyon, 9(12), e22729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22729

Molin, F., & Brandt, E. N. (2023). behavioral sciences Transformational Change and Digitalization — The Case of the Swedish Road and Transport Administration.

Okur, M., & Güngör, H. (2025). Mobile Technology ‑ Enhanced 5E Learning Model in Physics Labs : An Analysis of Graph Drawing and Interpretation Skills. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 34(6), 1441–1466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-025-10222-3

Pramitha, K., Indhira, A., & Kusairi, S. (2025). Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika Systematic Review of Studies from 2016-2024. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika, 9(3), 425–435.

Sweller, J., Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design : 20 Years Later. Educational Psychology Review, 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5

Wang, L. (2022). Student Intrinsic Motivation for Online Creative Idea Generation : Mediating Effects of Student Online Learning Engagement and Moderating Effects of Teacher Emotional Support Student Intrinsic Motivation and Online. Front. Psychol, 13(July), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.954216

Wester, E. R., Walsh, L. L., Arango-caro, S., & Callis-duehl, K. L. (2021). Student Engagement Declines in STEM Undergraduates during COVID-19 – Driven Remote Learning, 22(1).

Wiseman, E., Carroll, D. J., Fowler, S. R., & Guisbert, E. (2020). Iteration in an Inquiry-Based Undergraduate Laboratory Strengthens Student Engagement and Incorporation of Scientific Skills ., 20(2), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v20i2.26794

Xiao, F., & Sun, L. (2021). Students ’ Motivation and Affection Profiles and Their Relation to Mathematics Achievement , Persistence , and Behaviors, 11(January), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.533593

Yu, J., Huang, C., Han, Z., He, T., & Li, M. (2020). Investigating the Influence of Interaction on Learning Persistence in Online Settings : Moderation or Mediation of Academic Emotions ? International Journal of Environmental Research and Pulic Health, 17, 2320.

Zhao, J. (2021). What factors can support students ’ deep learning in the online environment : The mediating role of learning self-e cacy and positive academic emotions ? Front. Psychol.