2008 AAHPERD Research Consortium Seed Grant Zan Gao, James C. Hannon, Maria Newton, Chaoqun

HuangUniversity of Utah

Background and Significance School physical education and children’s

physical activity levels Students’ situational motivation toward physical

education (Ryan & Deci, 2000) - intrinsic motivation (IM) - identified regulation (IR) - external regulation (ER) - amotivation (AM) IM and IR represent higher levels of motivation

Background and SignificanceMotivation and learning activity student

learning It is necessary to examine the relation between

learning activity and students’ motivation towards physical education (Chen, 2001).

Learning activity students’ in-class activity levels (Fairclough & Stratton, 2006).

Few studies have assessed the effects of learning activity on students’ physical activity levels using accelerometer.

Background and SignificanceMulti-activity units have dominated PE for

decades, today’s students healthy lifestyles, content related to fitness and health.

This study compared the impact of three types of learning activity on students’ motivation and in-class activity levels in physical education.

1. cardiovascular fitness 2. ultimate football 3. Dance Dance Revolution (DDR)

Study AimsTo examine the effect of three learning

activities on students’ situational motivation and physical activity levels in physical education classes.

To examine the relative contributions of the four situational motivation factors (intrinsic motivation, identified regulation, external regulation, and amotivation) to physical activity levels across the three activities.

Research HypothesesStudents would exhibit the highest level of

self-determined motivation in the DDR unit, followed by ultimate football and cardiovascular fitness.

Students would display significantly higher physical activity levels in the DDR and ultimate football than in the cardiovascular fitness stations.

Students’ intrinsic motivation is expected to be the most important predictor of their physical activity levels across the three activities.

Research Design and Participants

A repeated measures design Three days of in-class activity level and

situational motivation data for fitness, football, and DDR units respectively.

The participants: 412 7th-9th graders50-minute physical education class The fitness unit: five stations The football unit: play games The DDR unit:

Instrumentation Standardized self-report questionnaires were

used to assess students’ situational motivation in physical education class (Guay, Vallerand, & Blanchard, 2000).

In-class activity levels - accelerometers (ActiGraph GT1M) - three separate classes for each learning

activity

Data Analyses1. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients and Pearson

product-moment correlations were computed. 2. A MANOVA with repeated measures was

performed to examine if students’ situational motivation and physical activity levels differed by three activities.

3. Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) was used to assess the predictive utility of the situational motivation variables to students’ physical activity levels.

ResultsWilks’ Lambda = .24, F (10, 270) = 87.45,

p = .00, η2 = .76.

Variable Fitness Football DDR

M SD M SD M SD

TimeMV 40.46a 18.59 37.09a 25.24 7.91b 9.58

IM 4.73a 1.53 4.64 1.58 4.54b 1.55

IR 5.02a 1.34 4.78b 1.47 4.69b 1.43

ER 4.46 1.58 4.38 1.51 4.33 1.47

AM 3.52a 1.49 3.71b 1.53 3.84b 1.54

Table 1. MVPA and Motivation Differences by Learning Activity Table 1. MVPA and Motivation Differences by Learning Activity (N =(N =280)280)

a, b: there is a significant difference between the groups, a, b: there is a significant difference between the groups, p p < .05.< .05.

ResultsFinal estimation of variance componentsDf =373 Chi-square = 830.14 P-value = .00

CoefficienCoefficientt

T-ratioT-ratio Approx. d.f.Approx. d.f. P-valueP-value

IMIM 1.391.39 2.282.28 22602260 .02*.02*

IRIR .80.80 .62.62 22602260 .20.20

ERER .34.34 .50.50 22602260 .49.49

AMAM -1.81-1.81 .47.47 22602260 .00*.00*

Table 2. Prediction of MVPA (Table 2. Prediction of MVPA (N =280)N =280)

DiscussionStudents were not as physically active in

DDR as they were in fitness and football. Students’ also displayed lower level of

motivation toward DDR.The results suggest that fitness units are

an effective learning activity to incorporate to maximize MVPA and intrinsic motivation.

DiscussionStudents’ IM positively predicted

percentages of time spent in MVPA. Instructors should present and organize the activities in an interesting, novel, meaningful and enjoyable way which lead to the maximum of MVPA in physical education.

Future studies might focus on effects of skill levels on students’ motivation and MVPA in different activities.