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

Nele Van Doren, Katrien De Cocker, Tom De Clerck, Arwen Vangilbergen, Ruben Vanderlinde and Leen Haerens
Additional contact information
Nele Van Doren: Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
Katrien De Cocker: Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
Tom De Clerck: Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
Arwen Vangilbergen: Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
Ruben Vanderlinde: Department of Educational Studies, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
Leen Haerens: Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium

IJERPH, 2021, vol. 18, issue 14, 1-17

Abstract: 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.

Keywords: Self-Determination Theory; physical education; physical activity; motivating style; controlling style; motivation; gender; lesson topic (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/14/7457/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/14/7457/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:14:p:7457-:d:593191

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().