In higher education, instructional designers review the quality of online asynchronous courses with a check-the-box mentality: Does the course meet rigor requirements? Is all media accessible? Are assessments relevant? Do they support the learning objectives? When evaluating courses with this method, designers could reasonably check the boxes for the presence of the three indicators of self-determination—autonomy, competence, and relatedness. However, these conclusions rest on a superficial understanding of these profound human needs. Across disciplines, the literature supports that autonomy, competence, and relatedness not only contribute collectively to learners’ self-determination; each of them independently warrants its own rich exploration and intentional implementation into course design. With the rise of distance education and artificial intelligence, it is important to consider how instructional designers will plan supports for relatedness in online courses over the next few decades. In this vein, this paper examines how the literature in psychology and adjacent fields presents relatedness and how these findings can shape asynchronous course design over the next 25 years.
In their pioneering self-determination theory (SDT), Ryan and Deci (2000) posited that satisfying three psychological needs - autonomy, competence, and relatedness - can elevate individuals’ self-determination. Self-determination is the degree to which motivation originates from an internal source rather than an external source (Ryan & Deci, 2000). While many of the cornerstone instructional design models do not explicitly reference SDT, the essence of its principles appear in some places. For example, Merrill (2007) supported autonomy by promoting authentic real-world problem-solving, but his writings do not reference autonomy or SDT specifically. Similarly, Garrison, Anderson, & Archer (2000) emphasized the importance of social connection in online learning but only addressed relatedness indirectly rather than as a specific theoretical construct. Of SDT’s three components, relatedness stands out as the least developed in the literature. This paper examines relatedness as its own theoretical construct, surveying perspectives across multiple disciplines (mainly psychology, but also sociology and educational philosophy) to define it more precisely and to envision how it can advance online learning over the next 25 years. This interdisciplinary approach follows Shulman’s view that education is “not itself a discipline,” but a “locus containing… the perspectives… concepts, methods, and procedures” of many disciplines (Shulman, 1981, p. 6).
The remainder of this paper dissects relatedness across three dimensions, developing it theoretically based on the existing constructs of attachment, belongingness, and connectedness. Two of these dimensions are based on Ryan and Deci’s own descriptions of relatedness in SDT: briefly, “the need to feel belongingness and connectedness with others” (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 71). The remaining lens, attachment, Ryan and Deci (2000) explained in an offshoot of SDT called cognitive evaluation theory: “because extrinsically motivated behaviors are not typically interesting, the primary reason people initially perform such actions is because the behaviors are prompted… by significant others to whom they feel (or want to feel) attached…” (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 71). The following sections examine relatedness through the lenses of attachment, belongingness, and connectedness, with implications for instructional design discussed after each.
One way to understand relatedness is through the lens of attachment. Bowlby’s attachment theory (1969, as cited in Freeman, 2025) supports this notion. Bowlby described attachment as a social phenomenon in which a person maintains an affectionate bond with another. His classification of attachment as a social phenomenon resonates with the findings of Ryan and Deci (2000), who researched how the presence of a cared-for adult influenced babies’ decision-making. Further, Bowlby specifies that attachment is biologically based and applies to a limited number of long-term relationships throughout one’s life (as discussed in Freeman, 2025). According to the same source, those who are securely attached are more likely to be creative and engage in autonomy-supporting activities; likewise, those who lack secure attachment may experience anxiety and reluctance. Although much of Bowlby’s work considers the development of attachment bonds in infants, attachment theory also applies to peer/collegial dynamics (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). This application is most relevant when examining opportunities for building relatedness in online college courses. Mikulincer and Shaver (2007) examined the importance of adult attachments in handling stress. They found that individuals who have an adequate number of secure attachments cope with stress better than those who do not; Further, adult relationships promote co-regulation, whereby both subjects of a dyad (group of two) provide a secure attachment for the other; With the confidence that support is available when needed, adults can take risks and engage in autonomy-promoting activities. Importantly, as adults become secure as a result of co-regulating with an important peer, the need for co-regulation itself diminishes because people become more confident to handle distress alone (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007).
While the literature on SDT in online learning discusses attachment, belongingness and connectedness often in the same sentence, a wider survey of the literature shows that each is a distinct area of study with vital nuances that may contribute to a better understanding of how to implement relatedness in online learning. First, Bowlby treated attachment as a social phenomenon that impacts individuals from childhood to death (Freeman, 2025). Bowlby specifies that one’s attachment patterns are activated “by any situation that seems to threaten the achievement of proximity to the preferred figure” (Freeman, 2025). This raises an important philosophical question worth mentioning (although beyond the scope of this paper): assuming attachment manifests somehow in online learning environments, who is the “preferred” figure and how is proximity to that figure attained? While the most apparent answer is that the instructor is this figure, I hypothesize that each adult student has, as Bowlby reported, a select number of attachment figures in their physical environments whose presences, following SDT, motivate them to complete their online coursework. In either case, it is important to consider that humans fill this role of a preferred figure, rather than artificial intelligence; if this logic holds, relying entirely on artificial intelligence to guide adult learners would be catastrophic to students’ self-determination.
Additionally, the research supports that adults taking asynchronous online courses benefit from secure attachments with their peers. While attachment theory is often considered in the context of childhood development, research finds that it is an important ingredient to sustaining healthy adult relationships and one’s self-confidence. In the context of childhood development, the relationship between caregiver and dependent is examined. However, in adult attachments, peers often provide the most successful forms of healthy attachment (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). Promoting healthy peer-to-peer attachments in online learning environments can help reduce the stress associated with coursework.
In “The Need to Belong,” Baumeister and Leary (1995, p. 497) described belongingness as the “pervasive drive to form and maintain at least a minimum quantity of lasting, positive, and significant interpersonal relationships” stemming from their evolutionary desires to survive and reproduce, (which is more likely when a member of a group). Further, positive emotions (e.g. happiness, elation, and contentment) are associated with being welcomed by a group, and negative emotions (e.g. anxiety, jealousy, loneliness) are associated with being rejected by a group. Interestingly, they also report the somatic impact of rejection, correlating loneliness with decreased immunocompetence (Baumeister & Leary, 1995).
Baumeister and Leary’s (1995) findings reveal that the need to belong is a deep evolutionary need rooted in the will to survive as members of a group. It is questionable whether conventional asynchronous courses promote this need authentically. While group discussions support belongingness to some extent, there are several barriers. First, group discussions are often anonymous, or nearly anonymous: although students’ first and last names are typically present, learners often do not include images of themselves in their profiles. Second, learners are expected to post essay-style responses to the same questions, usually some sort of summary or analysis of the weekly reading or video materials. With overly-prescriptive prompts, learners lack the ability to be authentic, to speak their truths, or to offer controversial or novel insights. Finally, the advent of generative artificial intelligence and LLMs has added another layer of inauthenticity to discussion forums: now, learners do not even have to read their peers’ responses in order to generate a well-written response. They can simply copy-and-paste a post into an AI to summarize its output in response to a peer.
With this level of inauthenticity, it is clear that belongingness is not promoted in conventional online discussions.
While Baumeister and Leary (1995) considered relatedness relationally, others considered how connection shapes individuals. Laura Peppard (2024), President of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, identifies four domains of connection: with the self, with spirit, with others, and with the senses. Although my analysis focuses on connection in the context of social relatedness (connection with others), Peppard (2024) presents the four domains as interrelated: others, self, and spirit are presented as reciprocal relationships, while the senses are described as a universal driver. Her model, The Connection Paradigm, presents social connection (connection with others) as a reinforcer of connection with spirit and connection with the self. Also, the five senses influence social connection but not vice versa (Peppard, 2024).
Key contributors to the literature ground these reciprocal relationships, particularly self-connection ↔ social connection and spiritual connection ↔ social connection. First, humanistic psychologist Carl Rogers (1961, p. 36) grounded the relationship between self-connection and social connection, writing, “the degree to which I can create relationships which facilitate the growth of others as separate persons is a measure of the growth I have achieved in myself.” He also emphasized the importance of approaching these connections authentically: “I find I am more effective [in communicating with others] when I can listen acceptantly to myself, and can be myself” (Rogers, 1961, p. 51).
Second, the reinforcing relationship between spiritual connection and social connection (Peppard, 2024) echoes significant 20th century voices. First, Maslow’s discussion of self-actualization supports that social connection contributes to spiritual connection. Although Maslow did not discuss spirituality by name in this discussion, his description of peak experiences suggest that social connection can lead to an elevated lived experience. In his discussion of self-actualization, Maslow described a “peak experience” as an elevated lived experience that individuals can achieve when they satisfy their basic needs (including social connection) (Maslow, 1970, as cited in Haberlin, 2017). In Maslow’s words, peak experience “... seems to lift us to greater than normal heights so that we can see and perceive in a higher than usual way” (p. 25). Maslow’s mention of “greater than normal heights” both strike a spiritual connotation and support that social connection can lead to an elevated lived experience.
Prior to Maslow, William James (1902) described a similar state in his analysis of mysticism, further grounding the relationship between social connection and spiritual connection. He wrote of this experience, “In mystic states we both become one with the Absolute and we become aware of our oneness.” In short, when an individual becomes more connected spiritually, according to James (1902, p. 380), they feel more connected to everything else in the universe. Based on this, not only does spiritual connectedness bolster social connectedness, but all other forms of connectedness as well. In this regard, spiritual connection seems to eclipse the other domains of connectedness that Peppard (2024) describes.
The literature on social connectedness confirms that the more connected we are with others, the more connected we are with ourselves. In addition, the more connected we are with spirit, the better we can connect with others (Peppard, 2024). As stated previously, conventional practices in online course design promote only superficial opportunities for social connection. When designing supports for relatedness in online learning in the next 25 years, course designers should not overlook an integration of spiritual connection as an avenue to foster social connection. Peppard’s (2024) work suggests that spirituality is the most impacting domain of connection (because it reinforces all of the other domains). To many, encouraging spiritual connection is uncomfortable, perhaps because it is seen as off-topic to the subject matter, or because spirituality is too subjective an experience to stimulate reasonably objective discussion. But Peppard’s consideration of spirituality as a “domain,” rather than a subject, suggests that any topic can be discussed through a spiritual lens, similar to how any topic can relate to ethics or morality. Because we know that spiritual connection is perhaps the most important factor in feeling connected with others, designers should trial frequent opportunities for learners to express their spiritual experience in the context of the subject matter. For example, reflection questions could provide learners such an opportunity: Has learning about the consequences of AI deployment in the workforce reinforced or changed any long-held beliefs of yours?; Or: How might your personal spiritual experience and/or beliefs shape how you approach classroom management? These questions not only address spirituality conceptually but encourage subjective reflection. To answer this question, a student would need to answer personally and authentically. In an online learning environment wherein inauthenticity is the norm, spiritual discussion may be necessary to promote authentic thinking and connection with others.
In conclusion, current best practice in asynchronous online course design rests on a superficial understanding of relatedness. The literature shows consistently that relatedness is a profound and fundamental human experience, yet the cornerstone instructional design models hardly mention it. As a key factor in promoting self-determination, relatedness is crucial to learning. SDT holds that in order for students to be self-determined in their academic success, they need to relate on a human level to others in their environment. While this paper raises more philosophical questions than concrete solutions, they are necessary questions to be asked. By supporting belongingness, attachment with peers, and connectedness in online learning spaces, course designers over the next 25 years can shift instruction from impersonal to personal, potentially resulting in improved self-determination and the greater potential for transformational learning.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
Freeman, H. (2025). Revisiting the seminal studies of attachment formation and reevaluating what it means to become attached. Social Development, 34(1), e12765. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12765
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Haberlin, S. (2017). Using arts-based research to explore peak experiences in five gifted children. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 18(24), 1–22. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1145708
James, W. (1902). The varieties of religious experience: A study in human nature. Longmans, Green, and Co. https://archive.org/details/varietiesofrelig00jameuoft
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. The Guilford Press.
Merrill, M. D. (2007). A task-centered instructional strategy. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(1), 5–22. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ826059.pdf
Peppard, L. (2024). The connection paradigm. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, 30(5), 914–917. https://doi.org/10.1177/10783903241278002
Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. https://psy-akademie.at/fileadmin/Media/WPA/Ausbildungen/PSYCHOTHERAPEUTISCHES_PROPAEDEUTIKUM_A-PP/Unterlagen/A.2/Carl_Rogers_On_Becoming_a_Person_Chapter_1_this_is_me.pdf
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://selfdeterminationtheory.org/SDT/documents/2000_RyanDeci_SDT.pdf
Shulman, L. S. (1981). Disciplines of inquiry in education: An overview. Educational Researcher, 10(6), 5–12, 23. https://doi.org/10.2307/1175075
.jpg)
The article explores how Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and artificial intelligence (AI) can work together to create inclusive, data-informed instructional design.
Read more
To what extent does having web accessible course content promote academic performance among undergraduate distance education students?
Read more