Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Promoting autonomy-supportive teachers’ behaviour is important for teaching students to take responsibility for their performance and for increasing their level of enjoyment in physical education (PE). Based on self-determination theory, our research aimed to identify the antecedents of PE teachers’ motivational strategies that can facilitate students’ psychological needs satisfaction and positive outcomes during PE classes. A total of 376 primary and secondary school PE teachers completed our cross-sectional-design questionnaires in four Central European countries (Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, and Serbia). Measures included perceived job pressures, opportunities for professional development, perceptions of students’ self-determination in PE, teachers’ psychological need satisfaction in their job, teachers’ self-determination at work, and teachers’ provision of autonomy support, structure, and involvement strategies. Jamovi software for structural equation modelling and the path analysis method was used for statistical analysis. Following post hoc modification, the hypothesized model showed a good fit to our model (χ²(17) = 64.60, p = 0.00; CMIN/df = 3.80; CFI = 0.92; TLI = 0.81; SRMR = 0.05; RMSEA = 0.08). Results indicated that teachers’ opportunities for professional development had a significant positive relationship with their need satisfaction at work, which was positively linked with their motivation to teach. Job pressure was negatively associated with basic psychological need satisfaction. Teachers’ perception of students’ autonomous motivation was positively linked with their own autonomous and controlled motivation, and was also directly and positively linked to their use of involvement and autonomy-supportive teaching strategies.

Keywords

SDT physical education need-supportive behaviours determinants Central Europe

Introduction

Physical education (PE) teachers have a special position in the educational system. PE classes provide an opportunity to counteract insufficient levels of physical activity (PA) in children and promote active lifestyles inside and outside of school (Taylor and Lonsdale, 2023). PE in Central European countries has traditionally been a compulsory subject, taught by specialized teachers. PE historically focused on motor skill development, movement skill learning and a performance orientation, but recent years have seen significant change. Curriculum developments in Hungary, Romania, Slovakia and Serbia reflect a shift in priorities (Antala et al., 2023; Hamar and Soós, 2023; Radisavljević-Janić and Milanović, 2019; Rus et al., 2019). In these countries, while PE still emphasizes motor competency development and skill acquisition, there is an increased focus on health education and theoretical knowledge of sports. For example, in Serbia the subject has been renamed ‘Physical and Health Education’ (Radisavljević-Janić and Milanović, 2019). In Romania, curriculum change introduced a PE textbook, requiring students to learn theoretical concepts, which now factor into their assessments. Hungary implemented a new curriculum in 2020, aligning with 21st century expectations for an active lifestyle, realistic self-acceptance, autonomy, social responsibility and openness to innovation (Hamar and Soós, 2023). Since 2012, daily PE has become mandatory in public education in Hungary, and the amount of educational material has increased with the number of PE classes. Romanian public education is also looking for ways to increase the number of hours of PE (Hamar et al., 2017).

PE teachers’ own motivation plays a key role in increasing students’ interest in sports and PA (Van Doren et al., 2021). Motivated teachers create a supportive learning environment, actively engage students, and set high but realistic standards, leading to better learning outcomes (Taylor and Ntoumanis, 2007). Furthermore, PE teachers’ strategies to facilitate adaptive motivation within PE classes are essential to achieve these aims (Taylor and Lonsdale, 2023). The relationship between teacher and student motivation is a well-researched area. Therefore, it is unsurprising that self-determination theory (SDT) has been widely employed to study motivational dynamics, behaviour and student outcomes in PE (Taylor and Lonsdale, 2023). Additionally, SDT is highly relevant for examining how the different types of students’ motivation influence teachers’ motivation and choice of teaching strategies.

SDT assumes that human motivation is based on basic psychological needs satisfaction (BPNS) that mediates the relationship between social environments and internal motivational processes (Haerens et al., 2015; Jang et al., 2010; Ryan and Deci, 2018). These needs are autonomy (experiencing a sense of volitional choice), competence (feeling effective and capable), and relatedness (feeling connected with others) (Deci and Ryan, 1985; Ryan and Deci, 2018). According to basic psychological needs theory (BPNT; Deci and Ryan, 2004), humans have a natural inclination to grow and actively seek opportunities to fulfil these psychological needs. Research indicates that satisfying these needs fosters positive outcomes such as professional development, integrity and enhanced motivation (Ryan and Deci, 2018). The theory further asserts that these three needs are fundamental and universal (Chirkov, 2009; Ryan and Deci, 2000a). These tenets of SDT have been supported by mainly Western European research on the importance of basic psychological needs, personal autonomy, and motivation at work (Ryan and Deci, 2018; Stebbings et al., 2012). Some scholars from Eastern cultures have critiqued the universality of BPNS (Chirkov, 2015; Hofstede, 1983; Kitayama et al., 1997). These critiques often focus on the cultural variability in the interpretation and priorization of autonomy. For students, satisfying these needs is essential to fostering their motivation to learn, while for teachers, it is crucial for applying strategies that support student needs. To address the gaps in understanding the determinants of need-supportive teacher behaviours, it is important to expand the focus of research beyond Western European and North American cultures (Franco et al., 2024). This would allow us to determine whether and how antecedents differ from, or align with, those observed in the extant literature.

Teaching strategies in SDT

Following the three basic psychological needs formulated in SDT (autonomy, competence, relatedness), three broad types of teaching motivational strategies have been studied (see Figure 1): autonomy support, structure and involvement (Blais et al., 1993; Connell and Wellborn, 1991; Taylor et al., 2008).

Figure 1.

Hypothesized model of antecedents of teacher motivational strategies in PE.

The autonomy support strategy includes a verbal explanation – a rationale – of why effort during the activity might be useful. Applying the autonomy-supporting strategy, PE teachers prepare students for extensive knowledge related to the curriculum and themselves. It teaches them the consequences of their actions and cause-and-effect relationships. Teachers acknowledge the students’ needs and feelings and provide them with opportunities for input and decision-making (Mageau and Vallerand, 2003). For example, when students can decide for themselves whether to perform the harder or easier version of the exercise, they develop a more internalized sense of regulation for their performance (Reeve et al., 2003). Another application of autonomy support is when teachers allow students to choose from various activities, roles or methods to enhance their engagement. The positive effects and beneficial outcomes of autonomy support have been the focus of numerous studies (e.g. Cheon et al., 2014; De Meyer et al., 2016; Perlman and Webster, 2011). Students feel more empowered to select tasks that align with their skills and interests, which can improve their intrinsic motivation (Appleton et al., 2016; Standage et al., 2003). Moreover, autonomy-supportive teachers accept negative affect during learning and do not react with a controlling tone, demonstrating patience towards unfocused students (Perlman and Webster, 2011). Teachers foster enjoyment and willingness to participate, acknowledge students’ feelings and perspectives, listen actively and validate students’ emotions or preferences, and show empathy towards their experiences (Abós et al., 2018; Reeve et al., 2004). Teachers can provide meaningful options regarding tasks – choices should be authentic and connected to learning goals, so they avoid language that pressures students to behave in specific ways (Assor et al., 2002). Instead of saying ‘You must finish this task!’ an autonomy-supportive teacher might say, ‘You could try this approach and see how it works for you!’

The structure strategy is associated with a sense of competence and refers to establishing a well-organized, predictable environment where students understand expectations and experience success (Connell and Wellborn, 1991; Taylor et al., 2008). When providing help and support, the teacher provides clear instructions, sets high but achievable expectations and offers guidance when needed, reflecting on mistakes (Moè et al., 2022). A structured environment enhances a sense of competence and sustained effort (Hospel and Galand, 2016; Skinner and Belmont, 1993). During a basketball unit, the teacher could begin with simple passing drills, progress to shooting techniques, and then integrate these skills into a game, ensuring students feel prepared at each stage. Structure-focused communication provides step-by-step instructions and support as students progress through tasks. The feedback is specific, points out areas of success and informs students about where improvement can be made (Jang et al., 2010).

The involvement strategy nurtures the need for relatedness, as teachers demonstrate warmth, care, and personal interest in students’ learning (Connell and Wellborn, 1991; Skinner and Belmont, 1993). Teachers demonstrate involvement by being approachable, respecting students’ ideas and providing emotional support. In gaining understanding of students, teachers’ emotional commitment to the students’ needs in learning is evident, and the physical proximity between the teacher and the students is clear (Connell and Wellborn, 1991; Skinner and Belmont, 1993). Teachers might praise for effort rather than ability, fostering a sense of belonging and support. Teachers take time to learn about students’ interests and incorporate these into lessons. Involvement communication features friendly, inclusive language that shows teachers care about students and provides personalized attention, takes time to understand each students’ interests, strengths and challenges, and highlights the value of cooperation and connection within the group. Strong teacher–student relationships foster trust that is crucial for long-term engagement (Connell and Wellborn, 1991; Ryan and Deci, 2000b; Skinner and Belmont, 1993).

Antecedents of teaching strategies

The present study examined four antecedents of teachers’ motivational strategies – job pressures (time constraints, management and evaluation pressures), perceptions of students’ autonomous and controlled motivation, and professional development. Previous research with PE teachers in the UK has shown that the teaching environment influences teachers’ motivational strategies towards students (Taylor et al., 2009). In a qualitative study, teachers reported that time pressure is a consistent barrier to applying adaptive strategies. When teachers have limited time to complete a particular topic, they rush through the material and restrict students’ choices (Taylor et al., 2009). Possible pressure comes from the school board, e.g. the accountability demands, such as meeting performance metrics, which often promote maladaptive motivational strategies (Taylor et al., 2009). In Western cultures, school management often evaluates teachers by the results of the students. When evaluations emphasize outcomes over the process, they can erode teachers’ intrinsic motivation and promote controlled forms of motivation. According to Pelletier et al. (2002), the pressure from being evaluated may have a negative impact on teachers’ motivation towards teaching.

Besides contextual factors, research has focused on teachers’ perceptions of students’ motivation. In our study, these were assessed separately as autonomous and controlled motivation, rather than as a single index. With highly motivated students, it is easy and quick to develop relationships. When teachers experience a high level of autonomous motivation in students, they are more likely to use autonomy-supportive strategies (Pelletier et al., 2002; Taylor and Ntoumanis, 2007). Teachers can foster this by supporting autonomy, providing meaningful choices and using non-controlling language (Soenens et al., 2012). A group which does not have positive opinions, or has no motivation for school, takes longer to develop a good connection, so teachers will treat them differently (Taylor et al., 2009). Perceived controlled motivation indicates that students are driven by extrinsic factors, such as working for rewards, seeking the teachers’ attention, striving for good grades or avoidance of punishment. Studies indicate that it can lead to short-term compliance but may undermine long-term engagement (Skinner and Belmont, 1993; Soenens et al., 2012). Previous studies suggest that perceived students’ controlled motivation can negatively influence teachers’ BPNS. Any pressure or fostering from the teacher towards students undermines autonomy and relatedness within student–teacher relationships (Deci and Ryan, 2004). Teachers who encounter students with high controlled motivation may feel less effective in fostering engagement. Also, if the environment reduces the chances for positive student–teacher interactions, it can be critical for sustaining teachers’ motivation (Ryan and Deci, 2000a, 2018).

A positive component of the workplace environment is a sense of security and progression at work. Therefore, the possibility of professional development may play a crucial role in improving teaching strategies, enhancing the quality of education, and raising teaching standards (Sachs, 2016). Access to powerful learning opportunities is essential for teachers to achieve better schools and effective learning outcomes (Day, 2002). Recent studies have emphasized the importance of continuing professional development (CPD) in some European countries (Parker and Patton, 2017). Effective CPD is ongoing, sustained, and tailored to meet the needs and interests of teachers. It should acknowledge teachers as learners in an active and social environment, offering collaborative opportunities within learning communities. Furthermore, it should aim to enhance teachers’ pedagogical skills and content knowledge, fostered by a caring and supportive environment (Tannehill et al., 2021). CPD programs vary across Europe, but the work of Parker and Patton (2017) can serve as a solid foundation for developing a powerful program across the continent.

Researchers suggested that the perceived job pressures and student motivation from the work environment, as well as the teacher's autonomous orientation, determine BPNS (Taylor et al., 2008). According to the model of Taylor et al. (2008), fulfilling basic psychological needs positively influences teachers’ autonomous amotivation, which in turn has a direct positive influence on the chosen educational strategies of autonomy support, structure and involvement. Notably, BPNS has a direct significant influence on both involvement and structure strategies. Furthermore, other studies also showed that the adaptive (need-supportive) educational strategies used by PE teachers help to develop student motivation for PE and sports (Papaioannou et al., 2004). In addition, student motivation directly affects teacher motivation as well (Ntoumanis, 2005; Stebbings et al., 2015; Taylor and Ntoumanis, 2007). BPNS and teachers’ self-determined (SD) motivation thus serve as mediators between the workplace environment as an antecedent and the chosen educational strategies (Escriva-Boulley et al., 2021; Taylor et al., 2008).

The purpose of the research

Many authors have shown interest in interpreting autonomy within a sociocultural context, as previously noted (Kitayama et al., 1997; Markus and Kitayama, 1991), but no prior research has examined these associations of SDT within the Central European region. The influence of autonomy and autonomy support on human functioning and well-being varies across cultures. For example, autonomy was interpreted in modern, cross-cultural literature as a universal and natural human endeavour (Ryan et al., 1996). On the other hand, it was also interpreted as a socially constructed moral value embedded in a network of cultural phenomena and practices (Chirkov, 2009). However, the role of autonomy and autonomy support in human functioning and well-being differs across cultures: some cultures consider autonomy as a natural promoter of human well-being, while in others, its role depends on the value assigned to autonomy by the society (Bardi and Schwartz, 1996; Chirkov, 2009). Determining the appropriate level of autonomy for individuals is a sociocultural issue (Park and Chirkov, 2020). Geert Hofstede's research on cultural dimensions provides an insight into how cultural factors influence motivation in educational settings (Hofstede, 1983). In countries in this region, such as Hungary, there is often a preference for clear rules and structured environments in educational contexts (Koucky and Cernohorsky, 1996). This cultural trait may impact the implementation of autonomy-supportive teaching methods, as educators may lean towards rigid approaches. Central Europe leans more collectivist than Western Europe, and trends since the 1990s show a shift towards more individualistic values (Hofstede, 1983; Triandis, 2004). This shift affects classroom practices, with a growing emphasis on student autonomy. Central Europe often scores high on masculinity, competition and achievement (Kolman et al., 2003). This cultural focus could shape motivational strategies, aligning them with performance and success rather than cooperative or supportive approaches (Chen and Kirkman, 2024). These dimensions highlight the challenges of fostering autonomy-supportive teaching in Central Europe, as societal norms and values might prioritize structured approaches over autonomous learning styles (Hofstede, 1983; Triandis, 2004).

Our research focuses on examining the factors that are reliably related to the motivation and teaching strategies of PE teachers in Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, and Serbia, using SDT as a framework. The purpose is to determine whether the examined factors of the environment (time pressure, management and evaluation pressures, opportunities for professional development and perceived student motivation) are the antecedents of teachers’ motivation strategies, either directly or via their reported BPNS and motivation for work. Thus, we build upon previous work in this area by testing an expanded network of relationships (direct and mediating effects) in an understudied population, permitting a comparison with findings of earlier research undertaken in different cultures (Franco et al., 2024).

Hypotheses

Based on previous studies, we assume that the antecedents of PE teachers’ motivational teaching strategies can be found in the teaching environment as positive and negative components. To investigate these relationships, a conceptual model was proposed (Figure 1). As an extension of the earlier model of Taylor et al. (2008), perceived students’ motivation and teachers’ own motivation were assessed as separate autonomous and controlled motivational regulations. We hypothesized that environmental factors of perceived job pressures and perceived students’ controlled motivation were negatively linked with BPNS, whereas professional development and perceived students’ autonomous motivation were positively linked with BPNS. Furthermore, we hypothesized that BPNS directly and positively linked with teachers’ autonomous motivation and negatively with teachers’ controlled motivation. Finally, we hypothesized that teachers’ autonomous motivation was positively linked with the dimensions of need-supportive strategies – involvement, structure and autonomy support – while controlled motivation was negatively associated.

Materials and methods

Participants

A total of 376 PE teachers participated in our study, 195 females (52%) and 181 males (48%). Convenience sampling was used to recruit the participants. The average age of the respondents was 41.79 years (range = 21–64 years, SD = 10.35 years; M_{teaching years}= 16.29 years, ranging from 1 to 41 years, SD = 10.47 years). The participants taught in primary and secondary schools, with 241 (64%) teaching only PE and 135 teachers (36%) teaching other subjects in addition to PE. All teachers voluntarily participated in the research and did not receive any compensation. The participants were aware that by completing the questionnaires, they were taking part in a scientific study. The anonymity of the respondents was ensured.

The data were collected in four countries – Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, and Serbia – among PE teachers from Hungarian-inhabited areas of Central Europe. Except for those in Hungary, the participants live as minorities in their respective countries. Table 1 displays the sample's characteristics, including gender, age, years of teaching, and school type. The questionnaires were completed in the Hungarian language via online and offline forms. The data were collected offline in 2018–2019. A total of 264 questionnaires were administered and collected through local contacts, who then returned them by post to the first author. Some questionnaires were scanned in and sent via email. The number of items in the sample was not considered sufficient, so additional respondents were recruited. Due to the slow process and COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, an additional 112 data were collected online with the assistance of local PE teachers.

Table 1.

Characteristics of the participants divided into the Hungarian-inhabited areas.

	Hungary (n = 127)	Slovakia (n = 86)	Romania (n = 104)	Serbia (n = 59)	Test
Gender (n, %)					χ²= 32.42***
Male	49 (13%)	28 (7%)	72 (19%)	32 (9%)
Female	78 (21%)	58 (15%)	32 (9%)	27 (7%)
Age (M, SD)	45.98 (9.26)	42.34 (9.64)	35.25 (10.04)	42.98 (8.59)	F = 23.78***
Teaching years (M, SD)	19.35 (10.45)	18.20 (10.45)	11.08 (9.62)	16.15 (8.55)	F = 14.61***
School type (n, %)					χ²= 43.52***
Primary	63 (17%)	59 (16%)	83 (22%)	25 (7%)
Secondary	40 (11%)	18 (5%)	14 (4%)	30 (8%)
12-year school	24 (6%)	9 (2%)	7 (2%)	4 (1%)

Note: ***p < 0.001.

Ethical approval was granted by the Research Ethical Committee of the Hungarian University of Sports Science (TE-KEB/No02/2024).

Measures

Perceived job pressures

The questionnaire was based on PE teachers’ self-reports regarding the factors influencing their choice of teaching strategies (Taylor et al., 2009) and was previously adapted for Hungarian participants (Csordás-Makszin et al., 2023). The questionnaire consists of seven items measuring job pressures. Two items assess time constraints (e.g. ‘Sometimes I have to miss things out of my lessons because of a lack of time’), and five items measure management and evaluation pressure (e.g. ‘I feel pressured because my performance is evaluated’). The answer categories were on a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (very true). The subscale scores were averaged and used as indicators of perceived pressure, with higher scores indicating stronger perceptions of job pressures.

Professional development

The questionnaire was based on PE teachers’ self-reports regarding the factors influencing their choice of teaching strategies (Taylor et al., 2009) and was previously adapted for Hungarian participants (Csordás-Makszin et al., 2023). Four items measure the professional development that teachers experience in schools (e.g. ‘I am given opportunities to progress in my teaching role’). The answer categories were on a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (very true). Higher scores indicate stronger perceptions of professional development.

Perception of students’ motivation

A questionnaire developed by Goudas et al. (1994) was used to measure teachers’ perceptions of students’ motivational regulation. The questionnaire consisted of 19 items and five types of motivational regulation based on the motivational continuum of SDT – namely intrinsic regulation (e.g. ‘Because they think PE is fun’); identified regulation (e.g. ‘Because they want to learn sport skills’); introjected (e.g. ‘Because they want me to think they are a good student’); external (e.g. ‘Because they will get into trouble if they don’t’); and amotivation (e.g. ‘However, they do not know why they do PE’). The answer categories were on a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (very true).

Autonomous motivational regulation was computed as the sum of the intrinsic motivation scale weighted by a factor of 2 and the identified regulation item. Similarly, the controlled motivational regulation was computed as the sum of the external regulation scale weighted by 2 and the introjected regulation scale (Hagger et al., 2014).

BPNS

BPNS was measured by the Basic Need Satisfaction at Work Scale (BNSAW; Deci et al., 2001). It consisted of three subscales and 18 items focusing on feelings related to job satisfaction. Autonomy was measured with seven items (e.g. ‘I feel I can take a lot of input in deciding how my job gets done’), competence with six items (e.g. ‘I have been able to learn interesting new skills on my job’), and relatedness with five items (e.g. ‘People at work are quite friendly toward me’). The answer categories were on a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (very true). Psychological need satisfaction was calculated as a single variable by summing the three subscales. A higher score indicates a greater level of BPNS.

Teachers’ motivation

Teachers’ self-determination towards work was measured using the Work Motivation Inventory (WMI; Blais et al., 1993). The questionnaire comprised 23 items, divided into six subscales. The subscales were: intrinsic motivation (e.g. ‘For the intense moments of pleasure teaching gives me’), measured with four items and which represents the most SD motivation; integrated regulation (e.g. ‘Because it has become a fundamental part of who I am’), had five items; and identified regulation, measured with four items (e.g. ‘Because I chose this type of work to attain my career goals’). These three types fall under the autonomous regulation of the individual. Introjected regulation was measured by three items (e.g. ‘I want to succeed at teaching, if not, I would be very ashamed of myself’); external regulation (e.g. ‘For the various social benefits associated with teaching’) was measured by four items; and amotivation, measured with three items, represents the lack of motivation at the end of the continuum (e.g. ‘I don’t know, I have the impression that I don’t have what it takes to teach’). The answer categories were on a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (very true). For the main analyses, we reduced the perceived focus of causality scales to two autonomous and controlled motivational regulation indices using weighted composites. Autonomous motivational regulation was computed as the sum of the intrinsic motivation scale weighted by a factor of 2 and the identified regulation item. Similarly, the controlled motivational regulation was computed as the sum of the external regulation scale weighted by 2 and the introjected regulation scale (Hagger et al., 2014).

Teaching strategies

Teacher as Social Context Questionnaire (Belmont et al., 2018) was used for measuring the teaching strategies (Csordás-Makszin et al., 2023). The instrument consisted of 12 items and three factors related to the three motivational strategies of SDT: involvement, structure and autonomy support. Four items measured involvement (e.g. ‘The students are easy to like’), six items assessed structure (e.g. ‘I find it difficult when students need help’), and two measured autonomy support (e.g. ‘It's better not to give students too many choices’). The answer categories were on a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (very true).

Statistical analysis

As a primary analysis, descriptive statistics, reliability analysis (using Cronbach's alpha), and assessments of skewness and kurtosis were conducted to understand the characteristics of our data. Differences between subsamples were examined using the chi-square test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey's post-hoc test. Furthermore, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to assess the construct validity of the measures. Subsequently, correlation analysis was performed to determine the associations between the variables. Furthermore, path analysis was used to test the previously proposed hypothesized model. Several fit indices were used to interpret our results for both CFA and path analysis. Chi-square (χ²), the relative χ² divided by the degrees of freedom (Chi-square minimum [CMIN]/df), the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), a non-normed fit index, the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), the comparative fit index (CFI), and the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) were utilized. The acceptable ranges of these indices were as follows: χ² was considered acceptable if it was not significant; however, it is highly sensitive to sample size. Therefore, CMIN/df was also used (Gerson, 2015). A CMIN/df value below 3 indicated an acceptable model. RMSEA values were considered acceptable if below 0.08. The TLI was deemed acceptable if above 0.90, with a good fit requiring a value above 0.95 (Hu and Bentler, 1999). The CFI was considered acceptable if above 0.90. An SRMR value below 0.08 indicated an acceptable model fit (Bryant and Satorra, 2012). Given the small numbers of teachers in the subsamples, we opted to analyse the sample as a whole. All analyses were conducted using Jamovi 2.3 on Windows.

Results

Primary analysis

During our primary analysis, we analysed the differences between the sample's characteristics (Table 1). Even though we found significant differences, we analysed our data together since there were no clear differences between the subsamples. For example, after conducting an ANOVA, followed by a Tukey's post-hoc test, we found that only Romania significantly differed from the other countries in both age and years of teaching experience.

As a primary analysis, CFA was conducted on all study measures to evaluate their construct validity and reliability. The questionnaires used in this study demonstrated an excellent or good model fit: teaching environment (χ²(223) = 95.70, p < 0.001; CMIN/df = 2.33; CFI = 0.96; TLI = 0.93; SRMR = 0.05; RMSEA = 0.06); perception of students’ motivation (χ²(133) = 342.93, p < 0.001; CMIN/df = 2.57; CFI = 0.93; TLI = 0.91; SRMR = 0.07; RMSEA = 0.06); BNSAW scale (χ²(141) = 339.72, p < 0.001; CMIN/df = 2.40; CFI = 0.95; TLI = 0.93; SRMR = 0.07; RMSEA = 0.06); the WMI (χ²(118) = 331.89, p < 0.001; CMIN/df = 2.81; CFI = 0.93; TLI = 0.90; SRMR = 0.07; RMSEA = 0.07); and Social Context Questionnaire (χ²(114) = 44.18, p < 0.001; CMIN/df = 2.59; CFI = 0.96; TLI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.06).

Table 2 shows the Cronbach's alpha coefficients and the mean, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis values for each variable. The Cronbach's alpha values varied between 0.66 and 0.80. The range of the variables varied between 1 and 7. The skewness and kurtosis values ranged between −0.57 and 0.91, indicating that it was acceptable for normal distribution (Forero et al., 2009).

Table 2.

Cronbach's alpha, range, mean, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis for all variables.

	α	Range	M	SD	Skewness	Kurtosis
1. Perceived job pressures	0.69	1–6	3.07	0.92	0.31	−0.02
2. Professional development	0.67	1–7	4.91	1.31	−0.35	−0.34
3. Perceived students’ controlled motivation	0.68	1–7	3.97	1.17	0.04	0.14
4. Perceived students’ autonomous motivation	0.89	1–7	4.90	1.16	−0.26	−0.13
5. Basic psychological needs satisfaction	0.73	1–7	5.24	0.88	−0.16	−0.57
6. Teachers’ controlled motivation	0.73	1–7	4.02	1.37	−0.24	0.05
7. Teachers’ autonomous motivation	0.87	1–7	5.01	1.29	−0.28	0.34
8. Involvement	0.72	1–7	5.74	1.06	−0.28	0.42
9. Structure	0.74	1–7	5.71	0.92	0.91	0.36
10. Autonomy support	0.66	1–7	3.36	1.47	0.73	0.28

Correlation analysis was used to examine the relationships between perceived job pressures, professional development, BPNS, perceived students’ autonomous motivation, perceived students’ controlled motivation, teachers’ autonomous motivation, teachers’ controlled motivation and the teaching strategies: involvement, structure and autonomy support (Table 3). The results revealed that most of the variables were positively associated, while perceived job pressures were negatively correlated with professional development (r = −0.26), BPNS (r = −0.27) and teachers’ autonomous motivation with the autonomy support strategy (r = −0.15). Among all significant relationships, the strongest correlation was found between perception of students’ autonomous and controlled motivation (r = 0.50).

Table 3.

Pearson correlation analysis of the study variables.

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
1. Perceived job pressures
2. Professional development	−0.26***
3. Perceived students’ controlled motivation	0.21***	0.06
4. Perceived students’ autonomous motivation	−0.03	0.31***	0.50***
5. Basic psychological needs satisfaction	−0.27***	0.43***	0.13*	0.25***
6. Teachers’ controlled motivation	0.08	0.12*	0.31***	0.25***	0.21***
7. Teachers’ autonomous motivation	0.04	0.27***	0.38***	0.44***	0.30***	0.45***
8. Involvement	0.16**	0.08	0.35***	0.18***	0.16**	0.21***	0.32***
9. Structure	0.19***	0.04	0.20***	0.15**	0.16**	0.22***	0.19***	0.37***
10. Autonomy support	0.06	−0.06	0.14**	−0.06	−0.02	0.29***	−0.15**	0.10	0.27***

Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

Path analysis

Path analysis was used to determine the associations between the variables in the study. The hypothesized model fit our data poorly (χ²(15) = 121.24, p = 0.00; CMIN/df = 8.08; CFI = 0.71; TLI = 0.51; SRMR = 0.10; RMSEA = 0.14). Thus, new paths were added to the model. Due to strong correlations among the variables, the perceptions of students’ motivations were directly linked to teachers’ autonomous and controlled motivation and also to the motivational strategies. Also, perceived job pressure was linked to the motivational strategies. With the help of the newly created paths, the final model showed a good fit (χ²(13) = 39.50, p = 0.00; CMIN/df = 3.03; CFI = 0.92; TLI = 0.86; SRMR = 0.04; RMSEA = 0.07). BPNS was significantly and positively associated with professional development and students’ autonomous and controlled motivation and negatively linked with perceived job pressure (Figure 2). Teachers’ autonomous motivation was positively associated with BPNS and students’ autonomous and controlled motivation. Teachers’ controlled motivation was positively associated with perceived students’ controlled motivation and BPNS. The involvement strategy – as the strongest effect – was positively linked with teachers’ autonomous motivation and BPNS. Teachers’ controlled motivation was negatively associated with the involvement strategy. In addition, BPNS and perceived students’ controlled motivation were positively linked with it. The structure strategy was associated with perceived job pressures, BPNS and teachers’ controlled motivation. The autonomy support strategy was positively associated with teachers’ controlled motivation and perceived students’ controlled motivation and negatively associated with teachers’ autonomous motivation. Indirect effects were also calculated, and they can be found in Supplementary Table 1. Our model explained 24% of the variance for BPNS, 25% for teachers’ SD motivation and 11% for teachers’ controlled motivation. The variances for the teaching strategies were: involvement = 33%; structure = 0.9%; autonomy support = 15%.

Figure 2.

Results of path analysis on antecedents of teacher motivational strategies in PE.

Discussion

Our study aimed to examine the antecedents of PE teachers’ motivational teaching strategies in Hungarian-inhabited areas of Central Europe. The results indicate that various factors of the teachers’ environment are significantly associated with their teaching strategies through multiple paths.

The associations of professional development, job pressures and perception of student autonomous motivation and BPNS were in line with our hypotheses. BPNS refers to the satisfaction of teachers’ basic needs as defined in SDT. Job pressures were found to negatively correlate with BPNS, which is not surprising as they often include time constraints that reduce teachers’ autonomous feelings and cause limitations in tasks such as curriculum processing (Taylor and Ntoumanis, 2007). Job pressures can also reduce feelings of competence and relatedness. For instance, a lack of student motivation can negatively impact a teacher's behaviour (Taylor and Lonsdale, 2023; Vasconcellos et al., 2020). Time constraints and management pressure, as components of job pressures, can further limit feelings of relatedness. Relatedness refers to connections with ‘important others’ (Deci et al., 2001) and, in a school setting, specifically includes relationships with colleagues and school leaders. When teachers experience pressure from the school board, their sense of relatedness is negatively affected (Ryan and Deci, 2018; Stebbings et al., 2015). A feeling of competence can be experienced by perceived students’ autonomous motivation (Taylor et al., 2008). When teachers perceive that students are engaged in activities, their BPNS increases. Relatedness can also be fulfilled by the perceived opportunity for professional development. Contrary to our expectations, perceived students’ controlled motivation showed a positive association with teachers’ BPNS. A significant positive relationship between these two variables may reflect the cultural or sociocultural norms of the examined region, where control over student behaviour is valued, or where teachers derive a sense of competence from maintaining structure in the classroom. This finding underscores the significance of contextual factors (Deci and Ryan, 2004; Jang et al., 2010; Ryan and Deci, 2000b). In the Central European region, where traditional values often shape educational practices, PE teachers may perceive students’ controlled motivation as a sign that students are taking their efforts seriously, even if the motivation stems from an external source. This interpretation might align with the cultural emphasis on discipline and compliance, influencing teachers’ perspectives on student engagement.

BPNS demonstrated a significant positive correlation with both teachers’ autonomous motivation and their controlled motivation. The positive relationship between BPNS and teachers’ autonomous motivation is underlying the tenets of SDT (Deci et al., 2001; Pelletier et al., 2002). The positive relationship between BPNS and teachers’ controlled motivation may reflect cultural characteristics of the sample. While BPNS generally fosters intrinsic motivation, in this context the controlled motivation is supported by societal, institutional or personal expectations that encourage teachers to fulfil external obligations.

In our study, perceptions of students’ autonomous motivation were directly linked to teachers’ autonomous motivation. It is a strong association in the model. When teachers feel the engagement of students in participating in different games or exercises, they are motivated to engage in further activities (Deci et al., 2001; Mageau and Vallerand, 2003; Pelletier and Vallerand, 1996).

An unexpected finding is that the perception of students’ controlled motivation had a positive and direct link with teachers’ autonomous motivation, which can be explained by several reasons. Positive classroom dynamics can lead to reciprocal motivation. Students’ controlled behaviours, such as striving to meet external demands, might create an environment where teachers feel encouraged to engage deeply with their work. This relationship highlights the interplay of teacher–student dynamics within a broader sociocultural context, demonstrating how teachers can experience autonomous motivation even in environments where external regulation is prevalent. The positive direct association between perceptions of students’ controlled motivation and teachers’ controlled motivation suggests that teachers and students share a dynamic and reciprocal relationship. If students’ engagement is driven by external pressures, teachers may adopt similar motivational patterns (Carson and Chase, 2009; Reeve, 2009).

A direct positive link can be seen between the perceived students’ controlled motivation, involvement and autonomy support teaching strategies. Teachers may respond to students’ controlled motivation by increasing their own involvement to create a supportive environment. For example, they might try to connect with students by showing interest in their progress, understanding their pressures or helping them navigate external demands. Teachers who recognize that students are primarily driven by controlled motivation might see a need to counterbalance this with greater involvement or maintain students’ focus. When perceived students’ controlled motivation positively associates with the autonomy support strategy, teachers may internalize students’ controlled motivation as part of a shared goal, using it to guide structured and supportive teaching practices.

Job pressures were directly linked with the structure strategy. Among the three need-supportive strategies, the structure strategy typically refers to approaches where teachers provide clear guidelines, routines and expectations to help students to stay organized and focused (Connell and Wellborn, 1991). While experiencing high job pressure and large workloads, they may turn to structured teaching strategies as a way to bring order and predictability to the classroom. Research indicates when teachers face external pressures, they may gravitate towards structured strategies (Ahn et al., 2021).

Teachers’ autonomous motivation was positively associated with the involvement strategy, underscoring the tenets of SDT and aligning with our hypothesis (Deci and Ryan, 1985, 2004). Our research on the involvement strategy revealed the most widespread predictors compared with the other two strategies. However, all three strategies are adaptive; in our sample, involvement was the most dominant strategy. It was directly linked to the perception of students’ autonomous motivation and teachers’ autonomous motivation. The involvement strategy means an emotional commitment to students’ performance and physical proximity (Taylor et al., 2008). Teachers’ controlled motivation aligns with the hypothesis, as it was negatively linked to involvement, because in a controlled environment emotional engagement is sometimes not considered appropriate.

Contrary to previous literature, in our study, teachers’ autonomous motivation was negatively related to the autonomy support teaching strategy. This relationship likely reflects the complex and contextual nature of teaching. Teachers who are highly autonomously motivated may not always apply autonomy-supportive strategies consistently, either because of a mismatch with students’ needs, differences in educational expectations, or personal beliefs about what motivates students most effectively. The autonomy support strategy reported the lowest scores among the three strategies (see Table 2). This finding likely emerged because in Central Europe teaching methods in PE are based on traditional approaches that emphasize structure, discipline, and teacher authority, and controlling teaching is not necessarily viewed as negative by students. According to previous research, teachers can be trained to successfully increase autonomy support in their practice (Aelterman et al., 2014). Promoting autonomy support in teachers’ training is an important issue in this area. Teachers’ controlled motivation was positively associated with the structure strategy. It can be interpreted as external motivation influenced by external pressures like institutional expectations. In response to these pressures, teachers are likely to adopt the structure strategy – clear rules, routines and controlled environments – to ensure they meet external demands (Abós et al., 2018).

Limitations and practical implications

Our study has a few limitations that need addressing in future research. Firstly, we relied on self-reported measurements, which can introduce self-bias. Secondly, our study is cross-sectional, and thus causality cannot be inferred. Thirdly, the five questionnaires were translated into Hungarian, but understanding PE terminology may have led to misunderstandings. Finally, we must acknowledge that we excluded integration and amotivation from the calculation of motivation regulations.

Despite these limitations, our research contributes to the literature by addressing the gap in understanding how environmental factors may influence teaching strategies within the specific sociocultural context of Central Europe. The findings offer practical implementations for improving teacher education and emphasize strategies to enhance teachers’ satisfaction and well-being, such as reducing their perceived job-related pressures.

Conclusion

Overall, we can conclude the following: (1) In Central European settings, the teaching environment surrounding PE teachers is linked to their motivation at work. (2) Among the examined antecedents, perceived students’ controlled motivation had the most widespread effect. (3) Positive outcomes of perceived students’ motivation on need-supportive strategies may reflect societal or institutional norms that emphasize external pressures such as grades, compliance, and discipline. (4) The motivational level of the examined teachers was high, but the reason for not applying autonomy support is probably the lack of knowledge of the advantages of autonomy-supportive teaching strategies. (5) Autonomy support as a motivational teaching strategy should be significantly promoted in Central Europe. Through this approach, children could learn to take responsibility for their learning and achievement in PE, while also gaining more enjoyment in the subject. We believe the current results provide useful information on PE teachers’ motivation and teaching strategies in the Central European region. In future studies, researchers should seek to gather data concurrently from countries in Western and Eastern regions, using the same assessment tools where feasible, in order to provide a more rigorous examination of similarities and differences in the determinants of teachers’ motivational strategies in PE.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-epe-10.1177_1356336X251337075 - Supplemental material for Antecedents of physical education teachers’ motivational strategies in Central Europe

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-epe-10.1177_1356336X251337075 for Antecedents of physical education teachers’ motivational strategies in Central Europe by Ágnes Csordás-Makszin, Christopher M. Spray, Tamás Berki, Pál Hamar, István Karsai and István Soós in European Physical Education Review

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank: Boros-Balint-Iuliana, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj, Romania; Sabolc Halasi, Novi Sad University, Novi Sad, Serbia; Lóránt Izsák-Székely, Hargita County School District Leader, Romania; and Jaromir Simonek Constantine the Philosopher University, Nitra, Slovakia.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical approval

The Ethics Review Committee at the Hungarian University of Sports Science approved our survey (approval: TE-KEB/No02/2024) on March 20, 2024. Participants were informed that by completing the questionnaires they were giving their consent to take part in the research.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Ágnes Csordás-Makszin

Christopher M. Spray

Tamás Berki

Pál Hamar

István Karsai

István Soós

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Authors biographies

Ágnes Csordás-Makszin is an assistant lecturer and a PhD student at the Department of Theory and Methodology of Physical Education of the Hungarian University of Sports Science in Budapest. Her primary research interests are motivational processes in PE and theory and methodology of PE.

Christopher M. Spray, PhD, is a reader in sport and exercise psychology at Loughborough University in the UK. His research focusses on young people's motivational processes in PE and youth sport and their implications for teachers, coaches and parents.

Tamás Berki, PhD, is a senior lecturer at the Department of Theory and Methodology of Physical Education of the Hungarian University of Sports Science. His primary research interests include sport motivation and commitment, as well as their effects on health and psychological behaviour.

Pál Hamar, PhD, DSc, is a professor at the Pedagogy Department of the Hungarian University of Sports Science in Budapest. His research focusses on curriculum theory and PE subject pedagogy.

István Karsai, PhD, is an associate professor at the University of Pécs in Hungary. His main research areas are healthy lifestyle education and the study of movement efficiency.

István Soós, PhD, is a research professor at the Pedagogy Department of the Hungarian University of Sports Science in Budapest. His research focusses on teaching styles, and teachers’ perception of students’ personal and social responsibility in connection with students’ motivation and behaviour.

References

Abós

Haerens

Sevil

, et al. (2018) Teachers’ motivation in relation to their psychological functioning and interpersonal style: A variable- and person-centered approach. Teaching and Teacher Education 74: 21–34.

Aelterman

Vansteenkiste

Van Den Berghe

, et al. (2014) Fostering a need-supportive teaching style: Intervention effects on physical education teachers’ beliefs and teaching behaviors. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 36(6): 595–609.

Ahn

Chiu

Patrick

(2021) Connecting teacher and student motivation: Student-perceived teacher need-supportive practices and student need satisfaction. Contemporary Educational Psychology 64: 101950.

Antala

Tománek

Poláčková

(2023) Curricular reform in Slovak primary schools and the place of the motor performance testing of pupils in 1st and 3rd grade in it. Fiep Bulletin – Online 93(I): 186–191.

Appleton

Ntoumanis

Quested

, et al. (2016) Initial validation of the coach-created Empowering and Disempowering Motivational Climate Questionnaire (EDMCQ-C). Psychology of Sport and Exercise 22: 53–65.

Assor

Kaplan

Roth

(2002) Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy-enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviours predicting students’ engagement in schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology 72(2): 261–278.

Bardi

Schwartz

(1996) Relations among sociopolitical values in Eastern Europe: Effects of the communist experience? Political Psychology 17(3): 525–549.

Belmont

Skinner

Wellborn

, et al. (2018) Teacher as Social Context Questionnaire. Available at: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/t10488-000 (accessed 3 February 2024).

Blais

Lachance

Vallerand

, et al. (1993) L’inventaire des motivations aut travail de Blais. Revue québécoise de psychologie 14: 3.

10.

Bryant

Satorra

(2012) Principles and practice of scaled difference chi-square testing. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 19(3): 372–398.

11.

Carson

Chase

(2009) An examination of physical education teacher motivation from a self-determination theoretical framework. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy 14(4): 335–353.

12.

Chen

Kirkman

(2024) The study of work motivation across cultures: A review and directions for future research. In: Gelfand

Erez

(eds) The Oxford Handbook of Cross-Cultural Organizational Behavior, 1st ed. Oxford University Press, 161–182. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/55822/chapter/436598755 (accessed 4 March 2025).

13.

Cheon

Reeve

, et al. (2014) The teacher benefits from giving autonomy support during physical education instruction. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 36(4): 331–346.

14.

Chirkov

(2015) Fundamentals of Research on Culture and Psychology. New York: Taylor & Francis.

15.

Chirkov

(2009) A cross-cultural analysis of autonomy in education: A self-determination theory perspective. Theory and Research in Education 7(2): 253–262.

16.

Connell

Wellborn

(1991) Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: A motivational analysis of self-system processes. In: Gunnar

Sroufe

(eds) Self Processes and Development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 43–77.

17.

Csordás-Makszin

Karsai

Hamar

, et al. (2023) Hungarian adaptation of the Teaching Environment Questionnaire and the TASCQ in a Central European sample. Magyar Pedagógia 123(2): 51–66.

18.

Day

(2002) Developing Teachers, 1st ed. London: Routledge. Available at: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781135711368 (accessed 4 March 2025).

19.

Deci

Ryan

(1985) Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. Perspectives in Social Psychology. New York: Plenum.

20.

Deci

Ryan

(eds) (2004) Handbook of Self-Determination Research, Softcover edition. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

21.

Deci

Ryan

Gagné

, et al. (2001) Need satisfaction, motivation, and well-being in the work organizations of a former eastern bloc country: A cross-cultural study of self-determination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27(8): 930–942.

22.

De Meyer

Soenens

Vansteenkiste

, et al. (2016) Do students with different motives for physical education respond differently to autonomy-supportive and controlling teaching? Psychology of Sport and Exercise 22: 72–82.

23.

Escriva-Boulley

Haerens

Tessier

, et al. (2021) Antecedents of primary school teachers’ need-supportive and need-thwarting styles in physical education. European Physical Education Review 27(4): 961–980.

24.

Forero

Maydeu-Olivares

Gallardo-Pujol

(2009) Factor analysis with ordinal indicators: A Monte Carlo Study comparing DWLS and ULS estimation. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 16(4): 625–641.

25.

Franco

Coterón

Spray

(2024) Antecedents of teachers’ motivational behaviours in physical education: A scoping review utilising achievement goal and self-determination theory perspectives. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology: 1–40.

26.

Gerson

(2015) Structural Equation Modeling, 2015th ed. Asheboro, NC: Statistical Associates Publishers.

27.

Goudas

Biddle

Fox

(1994) Perceived locus of causality, goal orientations, and perceived competence in school physical education classes. British Journal of Educational Psychology 64(3): 453–463.

28.

Haerens

Aelterman

Vansteenkiste

, et al. (2015) Do perceived autonomy-supportive and controlling teaching relate to physical education students’ motivational experiences through unique pathways? Distinguishing between the bright and dark side of motivation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise 16: 26–36.

29.

Hagger

Hardcastle

Chater

, et al. (2014) Autonomous and controlled motivational regulations for multiple health-related behaviors: Between- and within-participants analyses. Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine 2(1): 565–601.

30.

Hamar

Karsai

Prihoda

, et al. (2017) Physical education teachers’ views of best practice on physical education teaching in Hungary in the period of introducing daily physical education. PedActa 7(2): 1–10.

31.

Hamar

Soós

(2023) Analytical presentation of the 2020 national core curriculum in Hungary. Studia Universitatis Babeş-Bolyai Educatio Artis Gymnasticae 67(4): 95–102.

32.

Hofstede

(1983) National cultures in four dimensions: A research-based theory of cultural differences among nations. International Studies of Management & Organization 13(1–2): 46–74.

33.

Hospel

Galand

(2016) Are both classroom autonomy support and structure equally important for students’ engagement? A multilevel analysis. Learning and Instruction 41: 1–10.

34.

Bentler

(1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 6(1): 1–55.

35.

Jang

Reeve

Deci

(2010) Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology 102(3): 588–600.

36.

Kitayama

Markus

Matsumoto

, et al. (1997) Individual and collective processes in the construction of the self: Self-enhancement in the United States and self-criticism in Japan. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 72(6): 1245–1267.

37.

Kolman

Noorderhaven

Hofstede

, et al. (2003) Cross-cultural differences in Central Europe. Journal of Managerial Psychology 18(1): 76–88.

38.

Koucky

Cernohorsky

(1996) Educational reforms in changing societies: Central Europe in the period of transition. European Journal of Education 31(1): 7–24.

39.

Mageau

Vallerand

(2003) The coach–athlete relationship: A motivational model. Journal of Sports Sciences 21(11): 883–904.

40.

Markus

Kitayama

(1991) Cultural variation in the self-concept. In: Strauss

Goethals

(eds) The Self: Interdisciplinary Approaches. New York: Springer, 18–48. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-1-4684-8264-5_2 (accessed 7 April 2024).

41.

Moè

Consiglio

Katz

(2022) Exploring the circumplex model of motivating and demotivating teaching styles: The role of teacher need satisfaction and need frustration. Teaching and Teacher Education 118: 103823.

42.

Ntoumanis

(2005) A prospective study of participation in optional school physical education using a self-determination theory framework. Journal of Educational Psychology 97(3): 444–453.

43.

Papaioannou

Marsh

Theodorakis

(2004) A multilevel approach to motivational climate in physical education and sport settings: An individual or a group level construct? Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 26(1): 90–118.

44.

Park

MS-A

Chirkov

(2020) Editorial: Culture, self, and autonomy. Frontiers in Psychology 11: 736.

45.

Parker

Patton

(2017) What research tells us about effective continuing professional development for physical education teachers. In: Ennis

(ed) Routledge Handbook of Physical Education Pedagogies. London: Routledge, 447–460.

46.

Pelletier

Séguin-Lévesque

Legault

(2002) Pressure from above and pressure from below as determinants of teachers’ motivation and teaching behaviors. Journal of Educational Psychology 94(1): 186–196.

47.

Pelletier

Vallerand

(1996) Supervisors’ beliefs and subordinates’ intrinsic motivation: A behavioral confirmation analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71(2): 331–340.

48.

Perlman

Webster

(2011) Supporting student autonomy in physical education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance 82(5): 46–49.

49.

Radisavljević-Janić

Milanović

(2019) Physical education in the Republic of Serbia. Fizicka kultura 73(1): 61–71.

50.

Reeve

(2009) Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist 44(3): 159–175.

51.

Reeve

Jang

Carrell

, et al. (2004) Enhancing students’ engagement by increasing teachers’ autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion 28(2): 147–169.

52.

Reeve

Nix

Hamm

(2003) Testing models of the experience of self-determination in intrinsic motivation and the conundrum of choice. Journal of Educational Psychology 95(2): 375–392.

53.

Rus

Talaghir

L-G

Iconomescu

T-M

, et al. (2019) Curriculum changes in secondary school physical education and sport subject in the Romanian education system. Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala 66: 342–363.

54.

Ryan

Deci

(2000a) Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25(1): 54–67.

55.

Ryan

Deci

(2000b) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55(1): 68–78.

56.

Ryan

Deci

(2018) Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness, Paperback Edition. Psychology. New York/London: Guilford Press.

57.

Ryan

Sheldon

Kasser

, et al. (1996) All goals are not created equal: An organismic perspective on the nature of goals and their regulation. In: Gollwitzer

Bargh

(eds) The Psychology of Action: Linking Cognition and Motivation to Behavior. New York City, NY: Guilford Press, 7–26. Available at: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1996-98326-001.

58.

Sachs

(2016) Teacher professionalism: Why are we still talking about it? Teachers and Teaching 22(4): 413–425.

59.

Skinner

Belmont

(1993) Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology 85(4): 571–581.

60.

Soenens

Sierens

Vansteenkiste

, et al. (2012) Psychologically controlling teaching: Examining outcomes, antecedents, and mediators. Journal of Educational Psychology 104(1): 108–120.

61.

Standage

Duda

Ntoumanis

(2003) A model of contextual motivation in physical education: Using constructs from self-determination and achievement goal theories to predict physical activity intentions. Journal of Educational Psychology 95(1): 97–110.

62.

Stebbings

Taylor

Spray

(2015) The relationship between psychological well- and ill-being, and perceived autonomy supportive and controlling interpersonal styles: A longitudinal study of sport coaches. Psychology of Sport and Exercise 19: 42–49.

63.

Stebbings

Taylor

Spray

, et al. (2012) Antecedents of perceived coach interpersonal behaviors: The coaching environment and coach psychological well- and ill-being. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 34(4): 481–502.

64.

Tannehill

Demirhan

Čaplová

, et al. (2021) Continuing professional development for physical education teachers in Europe. European Physical Education Review 27(1): 150–167.

65.

Taylor

Lonsdale

(2023) Motivational processes in physical education: A self-determination theory perspective. In: Ryan

(ed) The Oxford Handbook of Self-Determination Theory, 1st ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 724–739. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/45638/chapter/396159622 (accessed 3 February 2024).

66.

Taylor

Ntoumanis

(2007) Teacher motivational strategies and student self-determination in physical education. Journal of Educational Psychology 99(4): 747–760.

67.

Taylor

Ntoumanis

Smith

(2009) The social context as a determinant of teacher motivational strategies in physical education. Psychology of Sport and Exercise 10(2): 235–243.

68.

Taylor

Ntoumanis

Standage

(2008) A self-determination theory approach to understanding the antecedents of teachers’ motivational strategies in physical education. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 30(1): 75–94.

69.

Triandis

(2004) The many dimensions of culture. Academy of Management Perspectives 18(1): 88–93.

70.

Van Doren

De Cocker

De Clerck

, et al. (2021) The relation between physical education teachers’ (de-)motivating style, students’ motivation, and students’ physical activity: A multilevel approach. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18(14): 7457.

71.

Vasconcellos

Parker

Hilland

, et al. (2020) Self-determination theory applied to physical education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 112(7): 1444–1469.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB