Antecedents and consequences of students’ motivation in Physical Education: A self-

determination perspective

99thth International Scientific Conference of IASK International Scientific Conference of IASK

““Scientific fundaments of human movement and sport practice”Scientific fundaments of human movement and sport practice”

RIMINI 16RIMINI 16thth – 18 – 18thth September September

Pr. Philippe SarrazinPr. Philippe Sarrazin

UFRAPS, BP 53 38041 GRENOBLE cedex 9.Web Site : www.ujf-grenoble.fr/ufraps/Recherche/SENS/

Research Question Over the last decades, students’ motivation has

become one of the major issues in the educational setting

Even if sport seems more “fun” for students, problems are the same in compulsory physical education (PE) courses than in other academics area.

It seems important to understand why some students to understand why some students are not motivated and how to nourish their motivation are not motivated and how to nourish their motivation in PE classesin PE classes, particularly because of the multiple benefits generated by a regular physical activity.

Several theoretical frameworks on student motivation consider that the reasons for doing an activity are more important to know than the degree of motivation: why does a student do an activity at school ?

According to Self-Determination Theory (SDT; e.g., Deci & Ryan, 2002), the degree to which behaviors are self-determined (i.e., autonomous or spontaneous) is important to know.

The Self-Determination Theory

Intrinsic Motivation

A-motivatio

nTo exp. stimul.

To know

To accomplish

Integrated regulation

External regulation

Identified regulation

Introjected regulation

Intrinsic motivation

Doing an activity for its own sake

Why do you do gymnastics?

“For the pleasure I feel when I practice”

A continuum of motivations more or less self-determined

A-motivation

Lost of contingency between an action and subsequent outcomes

Why do you do gymnastics?

“I don’t know anymore; I have the impression that I am incapable of succeeding in this sport. ”

External regulation

Involvement in order to attain a tangible reward or to avoid a threatened punishment

Why do you do gymnastics?

“because my teacher would be mad if I didn't practice anymore. ”

Introjected regulation

Involvement in order to fulfill an inner strength like avoiding anxiety or experiencing ego-enhancing pride.

Why do you do gymnastics?

“because I would feel ashamed to be too bad. ”

Identified regulation

Involvement is important in order to reach valued personal goals

Why do you do gymnastics?

“because I think it is a useful way to stay healthy. ”

Integrated regulation

When activity is fully assimilated to the self and brought into congruence with other aspects of values and identity.

Why do you do gymnastics?

“because doing sport is an integral part of my life. ”

The higher levels of self-determined motivation are related to several positive outcomes (effort, achievement, quality of conceptual learning, retention).

Results of researches in PE classes are congruent but scarce and “censurable” (e.g., utilization of self-reported measures and cross-sectional design). The different scales have been used separately or gathered into an index.

We believe that it is important to examine how the different kinds of motivation combine in distinct motivational profiles and what are their consequences.

Students’ motivational profiles in PE and achievement outcomes (Boiché, Sarrazin, Pelletier, Grouzet, & Chanal, submitted)

Students’ motivational profiles in PE and achievement outcomes (Boiché, Sarrazin, Pelletier, Grouzet, & Chanal, submitted)

• 215 students (99 fem. 116 males) from 11 to 17 years old215 students (99 fem. 116 males) from 11 to 17 years old• Prospective study Prospective study over 10 weeks in a gymnastics cycle.over 10 weeks in a gymnastics cycle.• Measures at the first lessonMeasures at the first lesson

Motivation toward gymMotivation toward gym (adaptation of SMS and EMS): 28 items, 7 subscales, >.70.

Level in gymnastics: three experts rated each student’s performance on Level in gymnastics: three experts rated each student’s performance on basic exercises (from 1 to 7; basic exercises (from 1 to 7; =.90).

• Measure at the middle of the cycleMeasure at the middle of the cycle Number of repetitions for 5 minutes recorded by a camcorderNumber of repetitions for 5 minutes recorded by a camcorder

• Measures at the end of the cycleMeasures at the end of the cycle Level in gymnastics: idemLevel in gymnastics: idem Grade given by teachers (from 0 to 20)Grade given by teachers (from 0 to 20)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

IM Stim IM Know+ Achiev

Ident Reg Introj Reg Extern Reg A-motiv

SD profile(N=72)

Moder MotProfile(N=95)

Non SDprofile(N=48)

Cluster analysis:

Final performance controlling for initial level (from 1 to 7)

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

5

5,5

SD profile Moderate profile Non SD profile

Final grade controlling for initial level (From 1 to 20)

7,5

8,5

9,5

10,5

11,5

12,5

13,5

14,5

SD profile Moderate profile Non SD profile

Number of repetitions for 5 min

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

SD profile Moderate profile Non SD profile

=

p<.01

p<.01

p<.12

Three motivational profiles seem to appear in PE classes, similar to the ones found by Ntoumanis (2002) with a British sample of students.

The most self-determined profile shows the best adaptive pattern, and the less self-determined the worse one. The third profile with middle levels of motivation on each type of regulation conduces to middle outcomes.

On what does self-determined motivation depend? On what does self-determined motivation depend?

Conclusion:

According to SDT:

The satisfaction of The satisfaction of psychological psychological

needs of:needs of:

- AutonomyAutonomy (feeling like the ‘origin’ and not the ‘pawn’ of one’s action)

- competencecompetence (feeling effective in one’s interactions)

- RelatednessRelatedness (feeling connected to others)

Self-determined motivation

Teachers’ Teachers’ autonomy autonomy

supportive vs. supportive vs. controlling controlling behaviorsbehaviors

•Responsive (listening, acknowledging student’s perspective)

•Supportive (praising student’s endeavors)

•Explicative (providing rational for tasks)

•Provide choice and opportunities for initiative taking

What are the “typical” teaching style of What are the “typical” teaching style of

PE teachers?PE teachers?

Are the teachers’ expectations about Are the teachers’ expectations about

students’ motivation related on the students’ motivation related on the

frequency of controlling vs. autonomy-frequency of controlling vs. autonomy-

supportive behaviors?supportive behaviors?

The effects of teachers’ expectations on teachers autonomy-supportive and controlling behaviors (Sarrazin, Tessier, Pelletier, Trouilloud, & Chanal, Int. J. Sport Exercise Psy., in press)

The effects of teachers’ expectations on teachers autonomy-supportive and controlling behaviors (Sarrazin, Tessier, Pelletier, Trouilloud, & Chanal, Int. J. Sport Exercise Psy., in press)

• 7 PE teachers and their 172 students (98 fem. 74 males; M 7 PE teachers and their 172 students (98 fem. 74 males; M age = 13.14 years) from 9 classes.age = 13.14 years) from 9 classes.

• Prospective study Prospective study over 7 weeks in a gymnastics cycle.over 7 weeks in a gymnastics cycle.• Measures at the end of the first lessonMeasures at the end of the first lesson

Students’ motivation toward gym (same questionnaire study 1)Students’ motivation toward gym (same questionnaire study 1) Teachers’ expectations about students’ motivation (2 items; e.g., “what Teachers’ expectations about students’ motivation (2 items; e.g., “what

level of effort do you think this student will make during the gymnastics level of effort do you think this student will make during the gymnastics session?”: (1) session?”: (1) “very few”“very few” to (7) to (7) “very much”“very much”).

• Measures during all the 6 following lessonsMeasures during all the 6 following lessons All the teacher-student interactions were videotaped. Only the teaching All the teacher-student interactions were videotaped. Only the teaching

behaviors directed towards behaviors directed towards individualindividual student and student and initiatedinitiated by the teachers by the teachers were taken into account.were taken into account.

Examples of behaviors which were coded: Examples of behaviors which were coded: Organizational communications told “in a Organizational communications told “in a controlling way”controlling way”

““You must move into the left-hand line”You must move into the left-hand line”

Organizational communications told “in an Organizational communications told “in an autonomy-supportive way”autonomy-supportive way”

““You can choose the group you want”You can choose the group you want”

Technical or tactical hints told “in a controlling Technical or tactical hints told “in a controlling way”way”

““Extend the arms, I have told you that 10 times”Extend the arms, I have told you that 10 times”

Technical or tactical hints told “in an autonomy-Technical or tactical hints told “in an autonomy-Supportive way”Supportive way”

““Maybe you could try different positions to jump Maybe you could try different positions to jump over this obstacle and choose the best”over this obstacle and choose the best”

Questions asked “in a controlling way”Questions asked “in a controlling way” ““What have I just said, Paul?”What have I just said, Paul?”

Questions asked “in an autonomy-supportive way”Questions asked “in an autonomy-supportive way” ““Which exercise do you want to start with?”Which exercise do you want to start with?”

PraisesPraises ““Well done!” Well done!”

EncouragementsEncouragements ““Now you’re getting the hang of it; let’s go!”Now you’re getting the hang of it; let’s go!”

Perspective-talking statementsPerspective-talking statements ““I can see that you are starting to be tired”I can see that you are starting to be tired”

NegatNegative communications or criticismsive communications or criticisms ““Shut up Paul!” or “You are completely Shut up Paul!” or “You are completely numskull!”).numskull!”).

Results and discussion: Results and discussion: • 6,369 teaching behaviors were coded6,369 teaching behaviors were coded• Prevalent behaviors : Prevalent behaviors :

ControllingControlling (37.22%): organizational, hints, questions told in a controlling (37.22%): organizational, hints, questions told in a controlling way + negative communicationsway + negative communications

Hints and organization communications told in a neutral way Hints and organization communications told in a neutral way (23.44%) (23.44%) PraisePraise (11.81%) (11.81%) Autonomy-supportiveAutonomy-supportive ( (4.6%4.6%): ): organizational, hints, questions told in an organizational, hints, questions told in an

autonomy-supportive way autonomy-supportive way

• Bounds “teachers’expectations – frequency of communication”Bounds “teachers’expectations – frequency of communication” When teachers had expectations of low motivation, they tended to initiate more When teachers had expectations of low motivation, they tended to initiate more

interactions with their students (interactions with their students (prpr = -.30, = -.30, pp<.001)<.001)

• Bounds “teachers’expectations – type of communication”Bounds “teachers’expectations – type of communication” When teachers had expectations of low motivation, they tended to be more When teachers had expectations of low motivation, they tended to be more

controlling with their students (controlling with their students (prpr = -.40, = -.40, pp<.001) than autonomy supportive <.001) than autonomy supportive ((prpr = .12, = .12, pp=.12).=.12). Ironically, these controlling

behaviors would foster more compliance and less self-determined motivation among students… which would confirm the teachers initial beliefs.

Is the autonomy supportive style Is the autonomy supportive style

teachable? teachable?

Is a sensitizing program on the benefits Is a sensitizing program on the benefits

of autonomy-supportive behaviors can of autonomy-supportive behaviors can

change teachers’ behaviors in the change teachers’ behaviors in the

classroom? classroom?

Do students perceive this change?Do students perceive this change?

The effects of autonomy-supportive training on the teachers’ behaviors in PE (Tessier & Sarrazin, Manuscript in preparation).

The effects of autonomy-supportive training on the teachers’ behaviors in PE (Tessier & Sarrazin, Manuscript in preparation).

• 5 PE teachers and their 96 students 5 PE teachers and their 96 students • Study carried out during the 8 weeks of normal coursesStudy carried out during the 8 weeks of normal courses• Two conditions :Two conditions :

Control group: 3 teachers (2 men and 1 woman) and their 62 studentsControl group: 3 teachers (2 men and 1 woman) and their 62 students Experimental group: 2 teachers (1 man and 1 woman) and their 34 studentsExperimental group: 2 teachers (1 man and 1 woman) and their 34 students

• Autonomy-supportive trainingAutonomy-supportive training Learn to built lessons which: Learn to built lessons which: (1) acknowledge and emphasize the students’ points of (1) acknowledge and emphasize the students’ points of

view, (2) encourage students’ choices and initiatives, (3) communicate the rationale view, (2) encourage students’ choices and initiatives, (3) communicate the rationale

underlying requests and constraints, (4) promote students’ interest in learning, and (5) underlying requests and constraints, (4) promote students’ interest in learning, and (5)

use a noncontrolling communication style. use a noncontrolling communication style.

Video analyses after each lessons in order to improve the support of the students’ Video analyses after each lessons in order to improve the support of the students’

autonomyautonomy

• The entirety of the 8 lessons was videotaped and The entirety of the 8 lessons was videotaped and then coded (same grille than in study 2).then coded (same grille than in study 2).

• During the last lesson, students filled out the During the last lesson, students filled out the Learning Climate Questionnaire (LCQ) intended to Learning Climate Questionnaire (LCQ) intended to measure their perceptions of the autonomy-measure their perceptions of the autonomy-supportive climate: 15 items (e.g., “supportive climate: 15 items (e.g., “I feel that my I feel that my teacher provides me choices and options.”, “My teacher provides me choices and options.”, “My teacher tries to understand how I see things before teacher tries to understand how I see things before suggesting a new way to do things”). suggesting a new way to do things”). =.82=.82

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

5

Praise Encouragement Question asked

auto-support

Perspective-

talking

Hints auto-

support

Negative com.

on student's

work

Question asked

controll

LCQ

Experimental group

Control group

ResultsResultsIn mean frequency by hour and by student

A training program A training program intended to help teachers to support intended to help teachers to support students’ autonomystudents’ autonomy can be effective. can be effective.

The effects of these overt and perceived behaviors on the The effects of these overt and perceived behaviors on the students’ motivation and involvement deserve to be students’ motivation and involvement deserve to be examined in future studies. examined in future studies.   

SDT seems to be a heuristic and promising theory to SDT seems to be a heuristic and promising theory to apprehend the students’ behaviors in PE course, in apprehend the students’ behaviors in PE course, in particular because it (1) distinguishes the antecedents and particular because it (1) distinguishes the antecedents and the consequences from various types of motivation and the consequences from various types of motivation and (2) offers some perspectives for intervention. (2) offers some perspectives for intervention.

ConclusionConclusion

On how the various motivations combine to predict the On how the various motivations combine to predict the behaviors. Are there other patterns than those we found behaviors. Are there other patterns than those we found in the first study? What are their motivational in the first study? What are their motivational consequences? consequences?

On the teachers’ behaviors intended to support the On the teachers’ behaviors intended to support the autonomy of the students. Are some behaviors more autonomy of the students. Are some behaviors more likely to nourish a particular need (autonomy vs. likely to nourish a particular need (autonomy vs. relatedness vs. competence)?relatedness vs. competence)?

Is there a student need to satisfy in priority according to Is there a student need to satisfy in priority according to certain demographics (e.g., age, sex, level).certain demographics (e.g., age, sex, level).

A few perspectivesA few perspectives

Thank you for your attention...

Grazie mille

Philippe SarrazinPhilippe Sarrazin

UFRAPS, BP 53 38041 GRENOBLE cedex 9.Site web : www.ujf-grenoble.fr/ufraps/Recherche/SENS/annuaire/sarrazin.html