How coaches’ need-supportive and controlling behaviors are related to different (mal)adaptive outcomes in water polo players: a person-centered approach

The relationship between both coaches’ need-supportive and controlling behaviors and different athletes’ motivational outcomes has been previously examined. However, little is known about the coexistence of coaches’ need-supportive and controlling behaviors in the sports context and even less, about what coach’s motivating style configuration may yield the most and the least adaptive pattern of outcomes in relation to athletes’ motivating experiences. Grounded in self-determination theory (SDT), this study aimed to identify coach motivating style groups based on athletes’ perceptions of need-supportive and four controlling behaviors (i.e., controlling use of rewards, negative conditional regard, intimidation, and personal control), and to examine their differences in terms of athletes’ motivational outcomes and sport commitment. Using a sample of 658 young water polo players (Mage = 14.76, SD = 1.36), results revealed five distinct coach motivating style groups. A coexistence of need-supportive and controlling use of rewards was identified among athletes in two groups. The “very low support-high control” group yielded the most maladaptive outcomes, while the “high support-low control” group was the most optimal style, even when compared to coaches that combined high need-supportive and controlling practices. This study provides deeper insights on how athletes may perceive simultaneously coach’s need-supportive and controlling behaviors, and how some controlling practices imply a higher motivational cost among athletes.

The Relation between Physical Education Teachers’ (De-)Motivating Style, Students’ Motivation, and Students’ Physical Activity: A Multilevel Approach

Research suggests that physical education (PE) teachers can play a crucial role in the promotion of students’ physical activity. Grounded in Self-Determination Theory, this study investigated how students’ perceptions of PE teachers (de-)motivating style relate to students’ device-based physical activity levels during PE. Moreover, it was examined whether students’ motivation plays an intervening role in this relation and whether students’ physical activity differs according to their gender and lesson topic. A sample of 302 secondary school students aged between 11 and 16 years (M = 13.05, SD = 1.04) completed a questionnaire assessing their perceptions of teachers’ (de-)motivating style and their personal motivation toward PE. Students also wore ActiGraph GT3X accelerometers during the PE lesson. Multilevel structural equation modeling revealed that the teachers’ motivating style had a significant positive relation with students’ autonomous motivation, both at the student level and the class level, and teachers’ controlling style had a significant positive relation with students’ controlled motivation and amotivation at both levels. However, in terms of students’ physical activity levels, students’ gender, the lesson topic, and teachers’ controlling style seemed to be more decisive than students’ motivation and teachers’ motivating style.

Antecedents of primary school teachers’ need-supportive and need-thwarting styles in physical education

It is widely acknowledged that teachers’ (de)motivating style (what they say, do and how they act) affects students’ learning. Understanding what leads teachers to adopt a (de)motivating style is necessary to develop effective training programmes. The current study aimed to identify antecedents of teachers’ motivating (i.e. need-supportive) and demotivating (i.e. need-thwarting) styles by (a) examining the relationships between five types of pressures and these styles and (b) investigating the mediating role of motivation. A total of 509 generalist primary school teachers completed a questionnaire about their perceived styles, perceived pressures from above (i.e. time constraints, pressure to display authority), below (i.e. perceptions of students’ disengagement) and within (i.e. beliefs about the effectiveness of rewards, and the adherence to entity theory), and their autonomous and controlled motivations to teach physical education. Structural equation modelling showed that a need-supportive style was negatively predicted by students’ disengagement and teachers’ adherence to entity theory, and this relation was fully mediated by autonomous motivation. A need-thwarting style was positively predicted by pressure to display authority and beliefs about the effectiveness of rewards. Results showed that when pressures from below and from within are reduced, teachers adopt a more need-supportive style, because they are more likely to enjoy and value teaching. Conversely, when pressures from above and from within are prevalent, teachers are more likely to adopt a need-thwarting style. This study identified the pressures to be targeted when developing interventions which aim to modify teachers’ (de)motivating styles which in turn could impact students’ motivation and behaviours.

Are teachers’ subjective feelings linked with need-supportive and need-thwarting motivating styles? A cross-lagged pilot study in physical education

This article examines the relations between the teachers’ subjective feeling and their motivating teaching style during physical education lessons. Doing so, it aimed at better understanding the emotional antecedents of the teaching behaviors. Twelve volunteer physical education teachers were filmed with their respective classes to assess the motivating style they used during their intervention. Immediately after, the subjective feelings they felt during the lesson were assessed using the affective slider in a video-based session. Cross-lagged multilevel modeling was then performed, controlling for emotional exhaustion level and demographic factors. Results showed that, at the within level, subjective pleasant feelings predicted positively the relatedness-supportive dimension of the motivating style, and negatively the controlling dimension. At the between level, the controlling dimension of the motivating style was positively related to the pleasant subjective feelings while the relatedness-thwarting dimension was negatively related to them. While literature has mainly examined the cognitive antecedents of teachers’ motivating styles, this study emphasizes the emotional processes occurring during the lesson. Based on the conceptual framework of teachers’ emotions model proposed by Frenzel (2014), results indicate that teachers react to their subjective feelings, modifying the way they interact with students accordingly. In parallel with cognitive determinants of teaching, the emotional dimension thus deserves to be more deeply considered in future teaching training programs.

TEACHING APPROACHES WHEN WORKING WITH STUDENTS WITH LOW SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS: DO TEACHERS GIVE STUDENTS AUTONOMY TO LEARN?

As PISA 2018 results show (OECD, 2018, 2019), students with high SES achieve better results in all countries than their peers with low SES. The impact of personal background circumstances on student performance is partly mediated by other factors, e.g. students’ access to educational resources, differences in the opportunity to learn, and grade repetition and tracking. Meanwhile, Jensen (2009) claims that the major factor affecting the achievement of students living in unfavourable conditions is not their living environment, but rather the school and the teachers. Jensen (2013) notes that the best strategy to help students with low SES achieve success in learning is to provide such conditions that they are involved in the learning process. Therefore, the present article explores how teachers employ self-determination theory when working with students with low SES. The participants in the quantitative survey were selected from five schools of one District Municipality in Lithuania characterized by low SES. The sample consisted of 95 teachers and 183 students. The results concerning the teachers demonstrate that the teachers working with low-SES status students have the moderately autonomy-supportive style, yet they tend to employ the controlling motivating style alongside the autonomy-supportive one. In the students’ opinion, they have a fairly close relationship with their teachers and feel understood by them. The students also maintain that the teachers give them choices, encourage them to ask questions and express confidence in their abilities. However, it can be determined that the teachers rarely seek to empower children to learn independently.

How does knowledge about the criteria for an upcoming test relate to adolescents’ situational motivation in physical education? A self-determination theory approach

Students’ knowledge about the criteria for an upcoming test is a crucial component of assessment quality. Grounded in self-determination theory, we investigated whether knowledge about the criteria for an upcoming test related to students’ situational motivation and experienced anxiety during physical education (PE). We also examined whether these relations were: (a) mediated by need-based experiences; and (b) moderated by teachers’ motivating style. Participants were 659 students (55.54% boys, 44.46% girls, mean age 14.72 years, standard deviation = 0.94) out of 40 classes from 32 schools taught by 39 different PE teachers. Analyses through multilevel structural equation modeling showed that students with more knowledge about the criteria for an upcoming test valued and enjoyed the lesson more (i.e. autonomous motivation), and felt less aloof (i.e. amotivation). Relations between knowledge about the criteria and students’ situational motivation were mediated by experienced need satisfaction. Specifically, students who had more knowledge about the criteria for an upcoming test felt more in charge of their learning process (i.e. autonomy satisfaction), felt more effective in reaching their goals (i.e. competence satisfaction) and felt more connected to the teacher (i.e. relatedness satisfaction). Although relations between knowledge about the criteria and students’ motivation were not moderated by teachers’ motivating style, teachers’ motivating style displayed independent relations with students’ motivation. Implications for assessment quality and students’ motivation in PE are discussed.