John M. Keller

  • Professor Emeritus of Instructional Systems and Educational Psychology, The Florida State University

[email protected]

Impact Metrics
10,631
Total Citations
10
PR Journals
0
h-index
0
i10-index
0
Top Conf
3
Other Works
Awards & Honors
Distinguished Alumnus Award

Instructional Systems Technology Program, Indiana University

1992
Instructor of the Year Award

Instructional Systems graduate students, The Florida State University

1990
Best Article of the Year (Performance & Instruction)

National Society for Performance and Instruction (NSPI, now ISPI)

1989
Research Fellowship

University of Twente (Enschede, The Netherlands)

1983
Outstanding Young Researcher Award

Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT)

1975
Past Positions

Professor, Instructional Systems and Educational Psychology, The Florida State University

1988–2010

Professor of Instructional Systems and Educational Psychology, The Florida State University

1985–2010

Visiting Scholar, Open University of Indonesia

1988–1988

Associate Professor, Instructional Science and Technology, The Florida State University

1985–1988

Assistant/Associate Professor of Instructional Technology (IDDE), Syracuse University

1974–1985

Associate Professor and Chair (Area of Instructional Design, Development, and Evaluation), Syracuse University

1979–1984

Research Fellow (Visiting), University of Twente

1983–1983

Assistant Professor, Instructional Technology, Syracuse University

1974–1979

Graduate Assistant, Instructional Systems Technology, Indiana University Bloomington

1971–1974
Education
Ph.D., Instructional Systems Technology
Indiana University Bloomington (1974)
PhD, Instructional Systems Technology and Organizational Behavior
Indiana University Bloomington (1974)
BA, Philosophy (minor in English)
University of California, Riverside (1965)
B.A., Philosophy
University of California, Riverside (1965)
Biography

John M. Keller is an American educational psychologist and instructional design scholar best known for creating the ARCS Model of Motivational Design—Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction—which he first introduced in 1979 and elaborated across numerous publications and a 2010 book. He earned his Ph.D. in Instructional Systems Technology from Indiana University (1974), served on the faculty at Syracuse University (1974–1984), and later at The Florida State University, where he became Professor of Instructional Systems and Educational Psychology and, in 2010, Professor Emeritus in the Department of Educational Psychology & Learning Systems. His work extends to later frameworks such as ARCS‑V and the MVP (Motivation‑Volition‑Performance) model, and has shaped research and practice in distance and online learning, human performance technology, and motivational design in education. citeturn24search12turn1view0turn18search2turn16search5

Theories & Frameworks
ARCS model of motivational design (including ARCS‑V and MVP)

A problem‑solving approach to motivational design integrating four core conditions—Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction—into instructional planning. Later extensions added Volition (ARCS‑V) to bridge motivation and action, and the MVP model (Motivation–Volition–Performance) to connect motivation and volitional control with performance outcomes. The framework provides analysis, design, development, and evaluation steps and a repertoire of tactics aligned with expectancy‑value theory and self‑regulation.

Introduced: 1979
ARCS Model of Motivational Design

A systematic motivational design framework comprising Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and Satisfaction, plus a process to analyze, design, develop, and evaluate motivational tactics alongside instruction.

Introduced: 1979
MVP Model (Motivation–Volition–Performance)

An integrative theory linking motivation with volition/self‑regulation and performance, extending ARCS by emphasizing volitional control and persistence.

Introduced: 2008
ARCS‑V (ARCS with Volition)

An extension of ARCS incorporating volition/self‑regulation explicitly into motivational design for technology‑enhanced learning.

Introduced: 2016
Research Interests
  • Design Theory in Instructional Design
  • Higher Education
  • Human Performance Improvement (HPI)
  • Message Design in Instruction
  • Motivational Design (ARCS/ARCS‑V/MVP)
  • Needs Assessment and Performance Analysis
  • Self-Regulated Learning
Peer-reviewed Journal Articles & Top Conference Papers
10

Open Praxis • Journal

John M. Keller

Reports development and validation of a two‑factor, 13‑item instrument measuring learners’ volition—action planning and action control—in online and face‑to‑face courses (N=594). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the structure; results suggest the instrument can be integrated with ARCS‑V/MVP‑based designs to assess volitional competencies.

Computers & Education • Journal

John M. Keller

This review synthesizes empirical studies applying the ARCS model across educational settings and countries. It analyzes how ARCS was implemented (single course components, multiple components, or programs), methods used (primarily quantitative), and reported outcomes (affective, cognitive, behavioral, psychological). The authors discuss inconsistent effects and recommend design‑based research to address motivational problems, especially in computer‑based learning.

New Directions for Teaching and Learning • Journal

John M. Keller

Provides an overview of the MVP (Motivation–Volition–Performance) model and shows how the ARCS‑V design process derives from MVP. Summarizes a design‑based research application, offering steps and examples for diagnosing motivational issues, selecting tactics, supporting volition, and evaluating performance outcomes in college teaching.

Participatory Educational Research • Journal

John M. Keller

Articulates ARCS‑V by adding Volition to the ARCS framework to bridge motivation and action. Provides guidance and examples for applying ARCS‑V in technology‑rich settings to stimulate and sustain motivation, support self‑regulation, and connect attention, relevance, and confidence with persistence and satisfaction.

Educational Technology Research and Development • Journal

John M. Keller

Randomized study in an educational technology course examining motivational/volitional email messages (designed via audience analysis) versus reminder‑only messages. The motivational/volitional condition increased learners’ volition and attitudes toward technology integration, though not overall motivation or performance, indicating targeted messages can facilitate positive dispositions toward integration.

Distance Education • Journal

John M. Keller

Introduces five first principles of motivation and volition for effective, efficient, and engaging (e3) technology‑assisted learning. Argues that despite the variety of modalities (online, hybrid, mobile), motivating learners requires common principles grounded in expectancy‑value and volitional control, and shows how to embed these principles into design and delivery.

Journal of Educational Media • Journal

John M. Keller

Reviews and extends the ARCS motivational design process for e‑learning. Summarizes studies in various online contexts and cultures, including tests of a simplified ARCS process and links to self‑regulation and personality characteristics. Concludes that a problem‑solving, audience‑analyzed approach to motivation systematically improves the design of diverse e‑learning environments.

Journal of Instructional Development • Journal

John M. Keller

This article presents the ARCS Model of Motivational Design, detailing its four categories (Attention, Relevance, Confidence, Satisfaction) and a systematic process for identifying and solving motivational problems in instruction. It also outlines design steps and early applications in teacher training to illustrate implementation.

Journal of Instructional Development • Journal

John M. Keller

Describes the ARCS model—Attention, Relevance, Confidence, Satisfaction—and its associated motivational design process (analysis, design, development, evaluation). Reports early field applications (e.g., inservice teacher projects), showing how classifying motivational problems and applying targeted strategies can improve the motivational appeal of instruction. Positions ARCS as a problem‑solving complement to conventional instructional design.

Journal of Instructional Development • Journal

John M. Keller

Presents a theoretical approach linking motivation with other factors that influence learning and instructional design. Reviews prior behaviorist and cognitive influences, introduces a systematic process for influencing motivation during design, and outlines concepts that later crystallized into the ARCS model. Emphasizes diagnosing motivational problems and aligning tactics with learner expectancies and values.

Other Works
3

Springer • Book

John M. Keller

Book-length synthesis of Keller’s motivational design approach. It introduces motivation concepts and applies them step by step to instructional design, organized around the ARCS components (attention, relevance, confidence, satisfaction). It provides tools, worksheets, and case examples for diagnosing motivational problems, selecting tactics, integrating them with instruction, and evaluating outcomes across K–12, higher education, and workplace settings.

2005
Principles of Instructional Design (5th ed.)

Wadsworth/Thomson Learning (Cengage) • Book

John M. Keller

An updated, research‑grounded text outlining a rational, learner‑centered basis for instructional design. Covers outcomes of instruction, task analysis, sequencing, events of instruction, assessment, group and online learning, and technology affordances. Integrates performance‑systems perspectives and offers job aids for course, unit, and lesson design.

Cengage Learning (Thomson/Wadsworth) • Book

Walter W. Wager, John M. Keller

Comprehensive instructional‐design text that integrates cognitive and information‑processing perspectives to guide analysis, sequencing, and delivery of instruction. The 5th edition updates Gagné’s events of instruction, expands attention to learner‑centered principles, technology affordances, online learning, and social/cultural contexts, and provides systematic procedures for objectives, task analysis, sequencing, assessment, and evaluation.