Students' Motivational Responses to Norm- and Criterion-Referenced Fitness Testing Programs

Background/Purpose:Various fitness testing programs are administered in physical education classes, generally with the goal of promoting physical fitness and encouraging students to be active. To date, however, there has been limited investigation into the motivational implications of fitness testing. The purpose of this study was to investigate how 5th grade students' achievement goals, intrinsic motivation, perceptions of the climate, and future intention to participate fitness-related activities varied as a function of participation in a norm- (i.e., President's Council Physical Fitness Test [PCPFT]) or criterion-referenced (i.e., FITNESSGRAM) program.

Method:Participants were 281 5th graders from 4 elementary schools where physical education teachers included either the PCPFT or FITNESSGRAM in their curriculum. After taking the fitness tests, students completed modified versions of the Task and Ego Orientation Sports Questionnaire (Duda, 1989), Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (Whitehead & Corbin, 1991), perceived climate (Xiang et al., 2003), and future intentions questionnaires (Xiang, et al., 2006). Validity of these modified instruments was established in a pilot study. Students were classified as “fit” (i.e., Award—Presidential or National Award or Healthy Fitness Zone [HFZ]) or “low-fit” (i.e., No Award or Needs Improvement [NI]) based on their fitness scores.

Analysis/Results:Data were analyzed using a series of 2 (Testing Program) X 2 (Fitness Status) MANOVAs and ANOVAs. Students who participated in FITNESSGRAM, regardless of fitness status, reported higher task-involvement [F(1, 280) = 4.572, p < .033], perceptions of a task-involved climate [F(1, 280) = 10.331, p< .001], perceived competence [F(1, 280) = 7.101, p < .008], and future intention to participate in fitness-related activities [F(1, 280) = 7.167, p < .008]. Students who participated in the PCPFT reported higher perceptions of an ego-involved climate [F1, 280) = 13.787, p< .000]. “Fit” students reported higher ego-involvement [F(1, 280) = 15.327, p < .000], perceived competence [F(1, 280) = 41.587, p< .000], effort [F(1, 280) = 5.668, p < .018], enjoyment [F(1, 280) = 5.459, < .020], and future intention to participate in fitness testing [F (1, 280) = 11.752, p = .001] and fitness-related activities [F(1, 280)=3.698, p < .05] than those categorized as low fit.

Conclusions: Findings demonstrate that the effects fitness tests have on student motivation should be carefully considered, especially for low fit students. The results suggest an emphasis on normative comparisons may be detrimental to student motivation and that an instructional focus associated with criterion-referenced tests may be more effective in fostering motivation.