An evaluation of students’ motivation in computer-supported collaborative learning of programming concepts

•This is the first study on motivation using CSCL for programming education.•Students are more motivated by using CIF+MoCAS than by collaborative learning.•CIF and MoCAS are associated with high levels of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.•Unexpectedly, CIF and MoCAS also are associated with amotivation. Motivation is a very important factor for successful instruction. This factor is especially relevant in collaborative learning contexts, where social interaction plays an important role. In this paper we present an evaluation of motivation in 139 students who were instructed under four pedagogical approaches: traditional lecture, collaborative learning, collaborative learning guided by CIF (an instructional framework for collaborative learning), and collaborative learning guided by CIF and supported by MoCAS (a collaborative learning tool). We considered the four dimensions of motivation according to self-determination theory. The statistical results show that, in global terms, students were more motivated by jointly using the collaborative instructional approach CIF and the MoCAS tool than by using a collaborative approach. Detailed analysis of the different kinds of motivation yields mixed results. Students who were instructed with CIF and especially those students instructed with CIF and MoCAS exhibited higher intrinsic motivation. Furthermore, students instructed with CIF and MoCAS were the most extrinsically motivated via identified regulation. With respect to extrinsic motivation via external regulation, students instructed in a traditional, individual way were more motivated than students instructed collaboratively. Finally, high levels of amotivation were also associated to instruction using CIF and MoCAS. In summary, our results suggest that CIF and MoCAS are associated with high levels of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, a finding that can aid in improving the learning processes, but they are also, unexpectedly, associated with amotivation, suggesting an overall increase in activation in the students who show mixed motivators.