Recent motivation research in physical education has begun to explore autonomous motivation in relation to objective measures of student learning (Shen, McCaughtry, Martin, & Fahlman, 2009). Using self-determination theory as a framework, Shen et al. found autonomous motivation to be a weak but significant predictor of cognitive learning achievement. The purpose of the present study was to extend this research by examining teacher perceptions of autonomy support and motivational constructs from self-determination theory and achievement goal theory as predictors of student achievement on a validated test of psychomotor performance (Bott, 2006; Williams, 2003).
Method
140 students (66 males, 67 females; mean age=14.83; 61% African American, 20% Caucasian, 19% other) enrolled in state-mandated physical education at a high school in a large Southeastern school district participated in this study with their teachers. Sixty-one percent of the sample were 9th grade students and 58% had no previous experience with recreational or scholastic athletics. The teachers (n=4) completed a self-report measure of their motivational style. Following a six-week volleyball unit, students completed measures of their motivational orientations, perceived autonomy-support, perceived motivational climate, psychological need satisfaction, and self-regulatory styles. Volleyball performance was measured using the South Carolina Physical Education Assessment Program volleyball assessment (SCPEAP, 2007). Two trained raters independently scored students' performance following SCPEAP protocol.
Analysis/Results
A one-way ANOVA was performed to compare class volleyball performance by teacher motivational style. A quasi-hierarchical stepwise regression analyses was used to predict volleyball performance, holding students' task and ego motivational dispositions constant. In the second step, motivational climate, perceived autonomy support, need satisfaction and self-regulatory style were entered in stepwise fashion. Classes with more autonomy-supportive teachers performed significantly better on the SCPEAP assessment than classes with less autonomy-supportive teachers (input statistics here). However, the only predictor of psychomotor performance was identified regulation, explaining 6.6% of the total variance (Adj.R2=.042; F(3, 117)=2.78, p<.05).
Conclusions
This study draws an initial link between autonomy-supportive teaching and actual motor skill performance in physical education. An important next step will be to verify self-reported autonomy support with observational data. Similar to Shen et al.'s study focusing on cognitive learning achievement, our results suggest student motivation plays a significant, though small role in predicting psychomotor performance in physical education. Future research should seek to understand the relative importance of self-regulatory styles in student learning and performance when compared to variables such as teacher expertise and quality and quantity of student practice.
See more of: Research Consortium