, Volume 57, Issue 4, pp 59–66 | Cite as

Improving college students’ attitudes toward mathematics

  • Charles B. Hodges
  • ChanMin Kim


This study was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of a treatment designed to improve college algebra students’ attitudes toward mathematics. Keller’s ARCS motivational design model was used as a guiding framework for the development of a motivational video, which was delivered online. The application of motivational design to improve mathematics attitudes in an online environment extends the use of motivational design. A pretest-posttest control group design was used to test the effectiveness of the treatment. The participants in this study were 43 students enrolled in a college algebra course offered at a large state university in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States. Statistically significant results were observed for improved attitudes toward mathematics.


Mathematics Attitude Motivational Design College Algebra 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aiken, L. R. J. (1976). Update on attitudes and other affective variables in learning mathematics. Review of Educational Research, 46(2), 293–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alkhateeb, H. M., & Mji, A. (2005). Attitudes of university precalculus students toward mathematics. Psychological Reports, 96(2), 257–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bleyer, D., Pedersen, K., & Elmore, P. (1981). Mathematics: A critical filter for career choices. Journal of Career Development, 8(1), 46–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chamberlin, S.A. (2010). A review of instruments created to assess affect in mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Education, 3(1), 167–182.Google Scholar
  5. Dogbey, G. Y. (2010). Attitudes of community college developmental students toward mathematics and their perception of mathematically intensive careers. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Ohio University, Athens, OH.Google Scholar
  6. Evans, B. (2007). Student attitudes, conceptions, and achievement in introductory undergraduate college statistics. The Mathematics Educator, 17(2), 24–30.Google Scholar
  7. Fennema, E., & Peterson, P.L. (1985). Autonomous learning behavior: A possible explanation of sex-related differences in mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 16(3), 309–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fennema, E., & Sherman, J. A. (1976). Fennema-Sherman mathematics attitudes scales: Instruments designed to measure attitudes towards the learning of mathematics by males and females. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 6(1), 31–32.Google Scholar
  9. Galbraith, P., & Haines, C. (1998). Disentangling the nexus: Attitudes to mathematics and technology in a computer learning environment. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 36(3), 275–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hemmings, B., & Kay, R. (2010). Prior achievement, effort, and mathematics attitude as predictors of current achievement. Australian Educational Researcher, 37(2), 41–58. Retrieved from
  11. House, J. D. (1995). Student motivation, previous instructional experience, and prior achievement as predictors of performance in college mathematics. International Journal of Instructional Media, 22(2), 157–167.Google Scholar
  12. Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development, 10(3), 2–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Keller, J. M., & Subhiyah, R. (1993). Manual for the Course Interest Survey (CIS). Florida State University.Google Scholar
  14. Kim, C., & Keller, J. M. (2007). Effects of motivational and volitional email messages (MVEM) with personal messages on undergraduate students’ motivation, study habits and achievement. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 36–51.Google Scholar
  15. Kim, C., & Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivation, volition, and belief change strategies to improve mathematics learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), 407–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kim, C., & Keller, J. M. (2011). Towards technology integration: The impact of motivational and volitional email messages. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(1), 91–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kim. C., & Pekrun, R. (in press). Emotions and motivation in learning and performance. Chapter to appear in the Handbook for Research on Educational Communications and Technology. Google Scholar
  18. Lent, R. W., Lopez, F. G., & Bieschke, K. J. (1991). Mathematics self-efficacy: Sources and relation to science-based career choice. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38(4), 424–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ma, X., & Kishor, N. (1997). Assessing the relationship between attitude toward mathematics and achievement in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(1), 26–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ma, X., & Willms, J. D. (1999). Dropping out of advanced mathematics: How much do students and schools contribute to the problem? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(4), 365–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mathematics Association of America, Curriculum Renewal Across the First Two Years, subcommittee of the Committee on the Underraduate Program in Mathematics (2007). CRAFTY guidelines for college algebra. Retrieved February 6, 2009, from
  22. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mayes, R., Chase, P. N., & Walker, V. L. (2008). Supplemental practice and diagnostic assessment in an applied college algebra course. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 38(2), 7–30.Google Scholar
  24. McLeod, D.B. (1988). Affective issues in mathematical problem solving: Some theoretical considerations. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 19(2), 134–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the national mathematics advisory panel. Retrieved from
  26. Neale, D. C. (1969). The role of attitudes in learning mathematics. Arithmetic Teacher, 16, 631–640.Google Scholar
  27. Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  28. Song. S.H., & Keller, J.M. (2001). Effectiveness of motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction on the dynamic aspects of motivation. Educational Technology Research & Development, 49(2), 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Twigg, C. A. (2003). Improving learning and reducing costs: New models for online learning. EDUCAUSE Review(September/October), 28–38.Google Scholar
  30. Wadsworth, L. M., Husman, J., Duggan, M. A., & Pennington, M. N. (2007). Online mathematics achievement: Effects of learning strategies and self-efficacy. Journal of Developmental Education, 30(3), 6–14.Google Scholar
  31. Zan, R., & Di Martino, P. (2007). Attitude toward mathematics: Overcoming the positive/negative dichotomy. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, Monograph 3, 157–168.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles B. Hodges
    • 1
  • ChanMin Kim
    • 2
  1. 1.Georgia Southern UniversityGeorgiaUSA
  2. 2.The University of GeorgiaGeorgiaUSA

Personalised recommendations