Physical education teachers inspiring young people towards a physically active lifestyle?!: Motivational dynamics in physical education Prof. Dr. L. Haerens Department of Movement and Sports Sciences Department of Developmental, Personality and Social Psychology Ghent University, Belgium

PHD-students Department of Movement and Sports Sciences (Ugent) Department of developmental, personal and social psychology (Ugent) Leen Haerens Greet Cardon Isabel Tallir Maarten Vansteenkiste Bart Soenens PHD-students

PART I: Teaching for health based physical education: what does it mean? PART II: Training teachers for health based physical education

PART I: Teaching for health based physical education: what does it mean? Objectives Stimulate evidence-based reflective thinking on the most appropriate content and pedagogy for health-based physical education (HBPE) Providing an overview of Self-determination Theory and linking its key principles to HBPE

PE = ‘the pill not taken’ (McKenzie & Lounsbery, 2009) One of the stated aims of all compulsory PE programmes is to educate for lifelong engagement in physical activity for health (Puhse & Gerber, 2005) BUT PE = ‘the pill not taken’ (McKenzie & Lounsbery, 2009) Lack of evidence on effective content and pedagogies for HBPE (Haerens et al, 2011) Yet, researchers are increasingly arguing that, with so many children from all social backgrounds experiencing physical education for several school years, physical education remains ‘the pill not taken’ (McKenzie & Lounsbery, 2009) and there is currently an astonishing lack of evidence around effective pedagogies for health-related physical education (Haerens et al, 20111).

Question 1: Is Increasing MVPA during PE THE WAY to promote lifelong engagement in PA?! Some researchers would argue that…. In order to accumulate sufficient amounts of MVPA during the day. In the present symposium we would like to challenge this point of view.

Is it really?.... Elementary schools 14 min MVPA 19 min MVPA Secondary schools => 20 min MVPA => 9 min MVPA First study in elementary schools MVPA based on observations using SOFIT Second study in secondary schools MVPA based on accelerometer measurements + PE has a wide range of goals to achieve

Need to promote transfer! Increasing MVPA during PE insufficient for health (e.g. Harris, 2000, Cardon et al, 2004, Aelterman et al, 2010) Need to promote transfer! PE has a wide range of learning goals that are all important There is no doubt that many teachers will be able to increase MVPA during PE, if that were their only goals. However, there is no evidence that increasing MVPA during PE will motivate young people to be more PA outside PA

Question 2: Ok, but what’s the alternative?

What is HBPE? =getting youngsters to value and enjoy physical activity for life so that they are (autonomously) motivated to become/remain active outside physical education In one of our recently published manuscripts we developed a pedagogical model or framework for HBPE, we argued that for PE to promote lifelong engagement in PA it is important to get youngsters to value and enjoy PA for health. This is because when youngsters value or enjoy physical activity for health they are called to be autonomously motivated to engage in such activities and autonomous motivation was found to relate to actiivty levels during, but also outside physical education in our work but also in the work of other sholars.

Question 3: Motivation, what is it?

SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY Prof. Edward Deci (University of Rochester, NY) Prof. Richard Ryan (University of Rochester, NY)

Controlled motivation Autonomous motivation Volitional motivation I’m going to be put effort into PE... ‘because my teachers will punish me otherwise’ ‘because I can only be proud of myself if I do so’ ‘because I feel more energetic afterwards’ ‘because I want to be healthy’ ‘because I like PE’ Punishment rewards expectations Shame, guilt, self-worth Personal relevance, meaningful Pleasure, passion, interest Controlled motivation Mustivation Autonomous motivation Volitional motivation Process of internalisation = ownership of change

What is HBPE? =getting youngsters to value and enjoy physical activity for life so that they are autonomously motivated to become/remain active outside physical education Conclusion the central theme of the model is theory driven as it aligns with autonomous motivation as conceptualized within SDT

Question 4: Is motivation really an important concept to consider in the relationship between PE and PA? What’s the evidence?

AUTONOMOUS MOTIVATION Increased physical activity during PE (Aelterman et al, 2012) Remain more active in leisure time (Haerens et al, 2010) AUTONOMOUS MOTIVATION

Question 5: How do we teach for optimal motivation?

Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985; 2000) Autonomy Competence Relatedness AUTONOMY SUPPORT RELATEDNESS SUPPORT STRUCTURE Sincere interest Choice Meaningful rationale Minimizing controlling language Fun elements Optimal challenge Positive feedback Encouragement Clear guidelines & expectations Sincere concern Warmth Unconditional regard Emotional support Now, previous empirical work in the broader education context has already pointed to the positive effects of specific need-supportive teaching behaviors. For instance providing choice in class, giving a meaningful explanation for tasks and avoiding the use of controlling language are strategies to support students’ need for autonomy. The provision of structure by giving clear guidelines and communicating expectations, but also giving postive feedback and encouraging students fulfill students’ the need for competence. And finally, showing sincere concern and unconditional regard and being empatic support students’ need for relatedness. Cox et al., 2008; Jang, Reeve & Deci, 2010; Mouratidis et al., 2008; Reeve & Jang, 2006; Sheldon & Filak, 2008; Vansteenkiste et al., 2004

Perceptions of need-support Autonomy-support Structure Involvement Perceptions of need-support Motivation Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985; 2000) TEACHER STUDENT Need satisfaction Autonomy Competence Relatedness Outcome Determinants from above: Number of students per class Available surface Work Climate Determinants from within: Gender, age/experience, competence regarding lesson content, degree Perfectionism General Causality Orientation Teacher beliefs about need-supportive teaching Burnout Determinants from below: (Dis)engagement from students Begeleidingscommissie Lynn Van den Berghe 15/05/2012

Teacher benchmarks for HBPE? Increasing autonomy support: e.g. providing choice Providing structure and competence support: e.g. help, differentiation Relatedness support: e.g. being sincerely concerned about your pupils In one of our recently published manuscripts we developed a pedagogical model or framework for HBPE, we argued that for PE to promote lifelong engagement in PA it is important to get youngsters to value and enjoy PA for health. This is because when youngsters value or enjoy physical activity for health they are called to be autonomously motivated to engage in such activities and autonomous motivation was found to relate to actiivty levels during, but also outside physical education in our work but also in the work of other sholars.

Question 6: Does teachers’ need support really leads to more autonomous motivation and higher activity levels. What’s the evidence?

Perceptions of need-support STUDIE 4 6a: Is need support notified by the students? TEACHER STUDENT ? Need-support Autonomy-support Structure Involvement Perceptions of need-support Motivation Need satisfaction Autonomy Competence Relatedness Outcome Sample: 43 schools 74 PE teachers (62.2% male, M age 37.5 ± 10.8 y) 910 students (53.9% boys; M age 15.2 ± 1.9 y) Begeleidingscommissie Lynn Van den Berghe 15/05/2012

+ + + Autonomy-support Autonomy-support Structure Structure E.g. The teacher asks the students questions about their interests, problems, values or wishes “Which exercises do you find hard to do?” “Did you understand the instructions?” + E.g. The teacher provides a rationale for guidelines, tasks and assignments. “A wider foot position is important because it enhances your balance.” Autonomy-support Autonomy-support Structure + Structure + Involvement Involvement E.g. The teacher takes the perspective of students into account, is empathic. “The teacher simplifies his language depending on the students’ development”

Perceptions of need-support STUDIE 4 6a: Is need support notified by the students? TEACHER STUDENT ? Need-support Autonomy-support Structure Involvement Perceptions of need-support Motivation Need satisfaction Autonomy Competence Relatedness Outcome Yes it is! Begeleidingscommissie Lynn Van den Berghe 15/05/2012

Perceptions of need-support 6b: Does need support lead to more optimal outcomes? TEACHER STUDENT Need-support Autonomy-support Structure Involvement Perceptions of need-support Autonomous motivation Need satisfaction Determinants from above: Number of students per class Available surface Work Climate Determinants from within: Gender, age/experience, competence regarding lesson content, degree Perfectionism General Causality Orientation Teacher beliefs about need-supportive teaching Burnout Determinants from below: (Dis)engagement from students Activity levels Begeleidingscommissie Lynn Van den Berghe 15/05/2012

Study 1 (Belgium) Study 2 (UK) Physical activity during PE: accelerometers (CSA Actigraph monitors) Study 2 (UK) Transfer of learning => to what extent does PE stimulates you to become more active during leisure time

NEED-SUPPORTIVE TEACHING BEHAVIOR Autonomy support Structure Involvement MVPA during PE Model has good fit! χ2 =2,295, df=2 RMSEA=0.012 CFI=1 SRMR=0.008 If pupils percieve their teachers as more need supportive, they tend to be more active.

Full mediation! χ2 =446.20, df=85 RMSEA=0.066 CFI=0,96 SRMR=0.049 Interestingly this direct relationship is fully mediated by students perceived need satisfaction and autonomous motivation

STUDENTS’ NEED SATISFACTION Autonomy-relatedness Competence MVPA during PE χ2 =84,24, df=18 RMSEA=0.062 CFI=0,98 SRMR=0.022 Interestingly pupils competence satisfaction directly relates to their MVPA, whereas for autonomy satisfaction and relatedness satisfaction no direct relationship was found.

Only partical mediation, direct relationship remains significant χ2 =185,163, df=49 RMSEA=0.054 CFI=0,99 SRMR=0.024 Pupils who perceive themsevles as more competent are more active, and become more autonomously motivated, which in turns relates to higher activity levels.

Methods Study 2 Multilevel Regression analyses (MLWin)

Methods Study 2 Multilevel Regression analyses (MLWin)

Teachers’ need support! Actual motor competence? Both studies point towards the importance of need support and need satisfaction Enhancing perceived competence might be crucial! The present study confirmed the proposed seuence by SDT. If students perceive their teachers as more need supportive they are more likely to become more autonomously moitvated at the student level because they also experience more need satisfaciton. Not only competence payed a role, but also autonomy satisfaction and relatedness satisfaction to the teacher because it affects pupils autonomous motivation. The question hence is which teacher behaviors are perceived as need supportive by the students. Teachers’ need support! Actual motor competence? Begeleidingscommissie Lynn Van den Berghe 15/05/2012

What is HBPE in secondary schools? =getting youngsters to value and enjoy physical activity for life so that they are (autonomously) motivated to become/remain active outside physical education What is HBPE in preschool and elementary schools? =providing young children with the necessary FMS to be able to feel competent when engaging in physical activities and sports in secondary schools and in later life? In one of our recently published manuscripts we developed a pedagogical model or framework for HBPE, we argued that for PE to promote lifelong engagement in PA it is important to get youngsters to value and enjoy PA for health. This is because when youngsters value or enjoy physical activity for health they are called to be autonomously motivated to engage in such activities and autonomous motivation was found to relate to actiivty levels during, but also outside physical education in our work but also in the work of other sholars.

NEED-SUPPORTIVE CONTEXTS AUTONOMOUS MOTIVATION The Bright Side of Self-determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985; 2000) NEED-SUPPORTIVE CONTEXTS Autonomy support Structure Involvement NEED SATISFACTION Autonomy Competence Relatedness AUTONOMOUS MOTIVATION Positive outcomes

Autonomous motivation Controlled motivation Question 7: What about the Dark side of Self-determination Theory? (Deci & Ryan, 1985; 2000) NEED-THWARTING CONTEXT Controlling Chaotic Cold NEED FRUSTRATION Autonomy Competence Relatedness Autonomous motivation Controlled motivation Amotivation Negative outcomes

Introduction Autonomy Autonomy AUTONOMY SUPPORT CONTROL Sincere interest Choice Meaningful rationale promoting initiative Fun elements Shouting, yelling, roaring Exerting power Losing patience Controlling language Pressuring pupils Criticizing pupils Now, previous empirical work in the broader education context has already pointed to the positive effects of specific need-supportive teaching behaviors. For instance providing choice in class, giving a meaningful explanation for tasks and avoiding the use of controlling language are strategies to support students’ need for autonomy. The two other presentations in the symposium will focus on this positive side of the story, however in the present presentation we will investigate the effect of need thwarting behaviors, and more specifically directly controlling behaviors namely behaviors that activitely frustrate pupils’ needs for autonomy. 4) A lack of autonomy support is not necessary equal to the presence of controlling behaviors, therefore we considered both as two separate dimensions of teachers’ behaviors, so that teachers can be autonomy supportive at one point during the lesson and controlling at another point. In many previous studies one score was created for teachers’ provided autonomy support that involved both the provision of support in terms of choice and the lack of controlling behaviors for instance in terms of not using controlling language. Similar to the positive side of the story, SDT also conceptualizes how the social context can actively thwart pupuils need so that feelings of need frustration and maladaptive outomces are more likely to emerge. The present study will focus on the (de-)motivational effects of a controlling teaching style.

Autonomy support i.e. ‘’ Lisa is there something wrong? I see you are struggeling with catching the ball. If you want that I show it again, you can ask me.’’ Controlling i.e. ‘‘ Come on Dean, just throw and catch (irritated). A boy of your age schould be able to do this naturally. NO, NO, NO, … STOP, NOT GOOD, come over here,…  ’’

CONTROLLED MOTIVATION PERCEIVED CONTROLLING c-path CONTROLLED MOTIVATION B = .43 (0.20)* b-path a-path BL2 = .60 (0.10)*** B = .41 (0.19)* PERCEIVED CONTROLLING BL1 = .66 (0.04)*** Indirect effect = 0.25 (0.12)* De Meyer J.*, Tallir I.*, Soenens B., Vansteenkiste M., Speleers L., Aelterman N., Van den Berghe L. & Haerens L. (Accepted pending minor revisisons). Relation between observed controlling teaching behavior and students’ motivation in physical education. Journal of Educational Psychology. *Equal contribution

PERCEIVED CONTROLLING Amotivation c-path AMOTIVATION B = .23 (0.21) b-path a-path BL2 = .54 (0.12)*** B = .41 (0.19)* PERCEIVED CONTROLLING BL1 = .67 (0.05)*** Indirect effect = 0.22 (0.11)* De Meyer J.*, Tallir I.*, Soenens B., Vansteenkiste M., Speleers L., Aelterman N., Van den Berghe L. & Haerens L. (Accepted pending minor revisisons). Relation between observed controlling teaching behavior and students’ motivation in physical education. Journal of Educational Psychology. *Equal contribution

Although teachers do not engage often in controlling behavior students do notice Controlling teaching behavior is related to less optimal forms of motivation Controlled motivation and amotivation are related with lower levels of PA in and outside PE (Aelterman et al., 2012 and Haerens et al. 2010)

PART I: Teaching for health based physical education: what does it mean? Conclusion

WHAT IS HBPE IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS? Conclusion WHAT IS HBPE IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS? Teaching for youngsters to be more likely to value and enjoy physical activity for life so that they become/remain active outside physical education TEACHERS NEED TO BE STIMULATED TO TEACH IN A MORE NEED SUPPORTIVE & LESS CONTROLLING WAY! The question remains which other factors are influencing pupils need satisfaction in the context of PE? INTERVENTIONS/CPD FOR TEACHERS NEEDED!

PART I: Teaching for health based physical education: what does it mean? Objectives Stimulate evidence-based reflective thinking on the most appropriate content and pedagogy for health-based physical education (HBPE) Providing an overview of Self-determination Theory and linking its key principles to HBPE

PART I: Teaching for health based physical education: what does it mean? PART II: Training teachers for health based physical education: what is needed?

Intervention and experimental studies needed Better insight into antecedents of teachers’ behaviors

1. Antecedents of need supportive and need thwarting teaching behaviors?

Controlled Orientation General causality orientation = The source of initiation and regulation of behavior in daily life. E.g., you are asked to plan a picnic for yourself and your fellow employees. Your style for approaching this project could most likely be characterized as: … Seek participation: get inputs from others before you make the final plans. Take charge: that is, you would make most of the major decisions yourself. To measure these causality orientations or motivational orientations, a vignette questionnaire was used. Causality orientations characterize people’s understanding of the source of initiation and regulation of behavior. Each vignette represents a situation in daily life, followed by responses that reflect the respondent’s degree of autonomous motivational orientation (e.g., “.Seek participation: get inputs from others before you make the final plans.”) and controlled motivational orientation (e.g., “.Take charge: that is, you would make most of the major decisions yourself.”). Autonomy Orientation Controlled Orientation

Controlled Orientation Need Support Need Thwarting Autonomy support Structure before activity Structure during activity Relatedness support Chaos Control Cold interactions Results confirmed the hypothesis that a controlled causality orientation relates to more overall observed need-thwarting teaching behavior. Teachers with a controlled orientation probably translate their personal way of functioning into the interpersonal style they use toward others. They would highlight pressuring elements (e.g., their own teaching agenda, competition, stressful interpersonal comparison, threatening evaluations) in their communication with students. By adopting such a style, they might come across as uninvolved and even cold as they likely bypass the students’ perspective. No relationships were found between a controlled orientation and chaotic teaching behavior. This could be due to the low internal consistency of the chaotic teaching behaviors scale. Also, the chaotic behaviors that were observed reflect a situation in which teachers create chaos, failing to nurture students’ needs for competence. However, this might not necessarily imply that students are actively frustrated in their need for competence. We speculate that maybe a different relationship with a controlled orientation would have been obtained if we had measured teaching behaviors that more directly refer to the thwarting of students’ need for competence. As for need-supportive teaching behavior, a controlled orientation related negatively to need-supportive teaching. One possible explanation is that control-oriented teachers are at greater risk of feeling exhausted and washed out because of their greater experiences of need frustration at work. As a consequence of their preoccupation with their own concerns, control-oriented teachers may have less energy available to invest in the students and to facilitate the learning process.

Need support / thwarting Within Above Below Need support / thwarting Antecedents Determinants from above: Number of students per class Available surface Work Climate Determinants from within: Gender, age/experience, competence regarding lesson content, degree Perfectionism General Causality Orientation Teacher beliefs about need-supportive teaching Burnout Determinants from below: (Dis)engagement from students Need to explore a wider range of antecedents in order to be able to design effective interventions for teachers! Begeleidingscommissie Lynn Van den Berghe 15/05/2012

2. Development of a theory driven intervention for PE teachers

Intervention need-supportive teaching style (Aelterman et al., 2013) Content: one-day training: 3 parts Part I: Theoretical background principles SDT Partl II: Overview of motivating/need-supportive teaching strategies illustrated by case studies and video images Autonomy-support Structure Relatedness-support Partl III: Application exercise Method of delivery ‘Teach as you preach’ The intervention involved a standardized one-day training that was systematically developed and optimized for and in collaboration with experienced PE teachers. The workshop-like training aimed at teaching PE teachers how to create an need-supportive learning environment and consisted of three parts: Part I provided theoretical background information on the basic principles of SDT. Specifically, the qualitative distinction between autonomous and controlled motivation, and the concepts of need-satisfaction and need-support were elucidated. In addition, empirical evidence was provided to support the argument that when students feel supported in their needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness, they better enjoy PE and acknowledge the value and personal benefits associated with PE. (2) Part II involved an overview of motivating teaching strategies with a specific focus on autonomy-support and the provision of structure. In this part of the training, teachers were given concrete guidelines on how to create a need-supportive PE class environment. Relatedness-supportive strategies were not presented as a separate category, but rather as general basic teaching qualities that help support autonomy and provide structure. Each strategy started from a concrete class situation or case study and the applicability and feasibility of the proposed strategies were illustrated by video images of authentic PE classes. (3) Finally, Part III consisted of an application exercise, in which teachers were given the opportunity to put the proposed motivating strategies into practice by means of microteaching in the gym. In line with the idea ‘to teach as you preach’, special attention was given to the method of delivering the training. Specifically, we attempted to be authentic by maximizing PE teachers’ opportunities to get their own basic psychological needs met during the training. For example, at the beginning of the training participants were invited to share their expectations toward the training, so that the trainers could better match the training with these expectations. In addition, along the training opportunities were created for participants to voice their opinion, and to discuss their ideas and experiences with each other. . Aelterman, N., Vansteenkiste, M. Van Keer, H., De Meyer, J., Van den Berghe, L., & Haerens, L. (2013). Development and evaluation of a training on need-supportive teaching in physical education: Qualitative and quantitative findings. Teaching and Teacher Education .

Theoretical framing is essential Theoretical framing is always important. Without this information, I don’t really think you know what you’re doing. Well, I think we can learn the most from autonomy-support. Structure we are already quite familiar with. Theoretical framing is essential Autonomy-supportive strategies are more innovative and useful Opportunities for interactive discussion and reflection Application exercises: microteaching and role-playing Teach as you preach! (= congruent teaching) ‘I think it would be more fun to do a practical session in the gym.’ ‘Wouldn’t it be interesting to have four different lesson plans to start from?’ ‘If the training would have taken till 4 o’clock pm, there would have been a good balance between theory and practice.’ ‘You could start from a couple of concrete class situations to introduce the different strategies’ ‘Maybe you can ask the audience for concrete examples from their practical experience?’

Illustration: Part 2 of the intervention

Providing autonomy support HINT 1: Stimulating initiative

Question: How does the teacher stimulates his pupils to take initiative? Fragment 2: 6 years of teaching experience; Baseball Girls Vocational education Final year of secondary school

HINT 1a: Try to integrate choice into your lessons to stimulate pupils to take initiative L zelf aan vorige slide de reden laten toevoegen.

Situation Although children can not always choose the topic of the lesson or the exerices themselves, there is still a possibility to incorporate choice into your lesson. In a series of lessons on handstand the teachers wants to provide opportunities for choice, how would you provide choice in such a lesson? KEUZE IN MOEILIJKHEIDSGRAAD Lln kiezen zelf of ze tegen rek, of met of zonder helpers willen oefenen KEUZE IN VOLGORDE Niet de L, maar de lln bepalen welke opbouw meer of minder zinvol is KEUZE IN PARTNER KEUZE IN TIJD BESTEED AAN EEN OEFENING OF DE SNELHEID VAN OVERGAAN NAAR EEN ANDERE OEFENING

Evolution in global appreciation of the training

3. Is the intervention effective?

METHOD Sample 39 PE teachers out of 19 different schools (79.5% men; M age= 38.51 ± 10.44 years) 669 students (63.4% boys; M age = 14.58 ± 1.92 years) Design T1 T2 Intervention N = 15 Control N = 24 WS 2 Pretest Posttest WS 1 Random assignment Aelterman, N., Vansteenkiste, M., Van den Berghe, L., De Meyer, J., & Haerens, L. (in preparation). Multi-informant effects of an intervention on need-supportive teaching in physical education.

Outcomes “Proximal” outcomes “Distal” outcomes Beliefs Behavior Effective Feasible Teacher Student Observer

Intervention effects on teachers’ perceived effectiveness of autonomy-support and structure

Intervention effects on teachers’ perceived feasibility of autonomy-support and structure ES = .11 ES = .14

Intervention effects on teachers’ autonomy-support ES = .06 ES = .24 β = .06

Three informants Teacher Student Observer Belief Behavior Behavior Effective Feasible Autonomy-support Structure Autonomy-support Structure Structure Autonomy-support Autonomy-support Relatedness support

Autonomous motivation to apply the strategies .32** .36** Need satisfaction training Controlled motivation to apply the strategies Intention to apply the strategies -.21* ns -.22* -.27* Defiance toward change Aelterman, N., Vansteenkiste, M., Van den Berghe, L., De Meyer, J., & Haerens, L. (in preparation). Multi-informant effects of an intervention on need-supportive teaching in physical education.

Training teachers for health based physical education: what is needed? Conclusion

Antecedents of teaching behaviors?! Collaborate with experienced PE teachers in terms of research. TEACH AS YOU PREACH Authenticity to the message by maximizing PE teachers’ opportunities for basic psychological need satisfaction

Ongoing projects building on this work What’s next? Ongoing projects building on this work Exploring motivational dynamics in vocational education Motivating role of after school sport programs How to translate SDT’s ideas towards motivational assessment? Exploring the interplay between actual and perceived competence Investigating reasons for non-engagment, defiance

Thanks to you for your interest in our work! Thanks to all collaborating researchers for their input for this presentation!