A cluster-randomized controlled trial of strategies to increase adolescents’ physical activity and motivation during physical education lessons: the Motivating Active Learning in Physical Education (MALP) trial

BMC Public Health

Chris Lonsdale¹  Taren Sanders¹  Andrew Bennie¹  Louisa R Peralta¹  David R Lubans²  Richard R Rosenkranz¹ 

[1] University of Western Sydney, Penrith, Australia;University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia

关键词: Self-determination theory;    Motivation;    Youth;    Adolescent;    Children;    School;    Physical education;    Physical activity;   

Others  :  1163029
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-12-834

 received in 2012-09-18, accepted in 2012-09-27,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

The physical activity (PA) levels of many children and adolescents in Australia are currently insufficient to promote health benefits. Physical education (PE) programs aim to promote PA and reach nearly all school-aged children, but PA levels within PE lessons are often low. PE teachers may influence children’s motivation to be physically active in PE lessons, but little is known about teacher strategies that effectively motivate children to participate in PA, and few intervention studies have examined motivational strategies in PE. The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of three motivational strategies, each based on Self-Determination Theory (SDT), on PA levels, and their hypothesized antecedents, during year 8 PE lessons.

Methods/design

This study employed a cluster-randomized controlled trial design. Following a familiarization session, PA levels and hypothesized PA antecedents were measured during a baseline lesson and a post-intervention or control lesson. Teachers (n = 16) and their classes from five secondary schools in Sydney, Australia were randomly assigned into four blocks and instructed to provide one of four 20-min lesson teaching strategy conditions: (1) explaining the relevance of activities; (2) providing choice from PA options selected by the teacher; (3) providing equipment and free choice of activities; or (4) usual practice. The primary outcomes were lesson time spent in moderate-to-vigorous PA, and motivation towards the lesson. Secondary outcomes were perceptions of teacher behavior, psychological needs satisfaction, and lesson time spent in sedentary behavior. PA and sedentary behavior were measured during baseline and post-intervention lessons with waist-mounted Actigraph GT3X accelerometers. Teacher behavior, psychological needs satisfaction, and motivation were assessed via questionnaires at the end of each lesson. Linear mixed-model analyses will be run on all outcomes, with students nested within teachers as a random effect.

Discussion

Study findings will inform the development of effective SDT-based teaching strategy interventions to enhance students’ psychological needs satisfaction, motivation, and PA levels. More effective teaching strategies may be identified that are capable of improving adolescents’ PA levels, and thereby provide beneficial population health outcomes.

Trial registration

This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials and is traceable as ISRCTN07038258.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Rosenkranz et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Mathers CD, Vos ET, Stevenson CE, Begg SJ: The burden of disease and injury in Australia. Bull World Health Organ 2001, 79:1076-1084.
• [2]US Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS): Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Report. US Department of Health and Human Services, Washington; 2008.
• [3]Department of Health & Ageing: 2007 Australian National Children’s Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey - Main Findings. Australian Government Department of Health & Ageing, Canberra; 2008.
• [4]Salmon J, Booth ML, Phongsavan P, Murphy N, Timperio A: Promoting physical activity participation among children and adolescents. Epidemiol Rev 2007, 29:144-159.
• [5]Lubans DR, Morgan PJ, Aguiar E, Callister R: Randomized controlled trial of the Physical Activity Leaders (PALs) program for low-active adolescent boys from disadvantaged secondary schools. Prev Med 2011, 52:239-246.
• [6]Peralta LR, Jones RA, Okely AD: Promoting healthy lifestyles among adolescent boys: the Fitness Improvement and Lifestyle Awareness Program RCT. Prev Med 2009, 48:537-542.
• [7]Trost SG, Rosenkranz RR, Dzewaltowski DA: Physical activity levels among children attending after-school programs. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2008, 40:622-629.
• [8]Van Sluijs EMF, McMinn AM, Griffin SJ: Effectiveness of interventions to promote physical activity in children and adolescents: systematic review of controlled trials. BMJ 2007, 335:703.
• [9]Crawford D: The future of sport in Australia. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra; 2009.
• [10]Fairclough S, Stratton G: Physical activity levels in middle and high school physical education: a review. Pediatr Exerc Sci 2005, 17:217-236.
• [11]Lonsdale C, Sabiston CM, Raedeke TD, Ha SCA, Sum KWR: Self-determined motivation and students’ physical activity in physical education classes and free-choice periods. Prev Med 2009, 48:69-73.
• [12]Jaakkola T, Liukkonen J, Laakso T, Ommundsen Y: The relationship between situational and contextual self-determined motivation and physical activity intensity as measured by heart rates during ninth grade students’ physical education classes. Eur Phys Educ Rev 2008, 14:13-31.
• [13]Spray C: Motivational climate and perceived strategies to sustain pupils’ discipline in physical education. Eur Phys Educ Rev 2002, 8:5-20.
• [14]Standage M, Duda JL, Ntoumanis N: A model of contextual motivation in physical education: using constructs from self-determination and achievement goal theories to predict physical activity intentions. J Educ Psych 2003, 95:97-110.
• [15]Ntoumanis N, Pensgaard AM, Martin C, Pipe K: An idiographic analysis of amotivation in compulsory school physical education. J Sport Exerc Psych 2004, 26:197-214.
• [16]Deci EL, Ryan RM: Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press, New York; 1985.
• [17]Ryan RM, Deci EL: Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In Handbook of Self-Determination Theory Research. Edited by Deci EL, Ryan RM. University of Rochester Press, Rochester; 2002.
• [18]Vansteenkiste M, Zhou M, Lens W, Soenens B: Experiences of autonomy and control among Chinese learners: vitalizing or immobilizing? J Educ Psych 2005, 97:468-483.
• [19]Lonsdale C, Hodge K, Rose EA: Burnout in elite sport: a self-determination perspective. J Sports Sci 2009, 27:785-795.
• [20]Wilson PM, Rodgers WM, Blanchard CM, Gessell J: The relationship between psychological needs, self-determined motivation, exercise attitudes, and physical fitness. J Appl Soc Psychol 2003, 33:2373-2392.
• [21]Taylor IM, Lonsdale C: Cultural differences in the relationships between autonomy support, psychological need satisfaction, subjective vitality, and effort in British and Chinese physical education. J Sport Exerc Psych 2010, 32:655-673.
• [22]Ntoumanis N, Standage M: Motivation in physical education classes: a self-determination theory perspective. J Res Theory Educ 2009, 7:194-202.
• [23]Taylor IM, Ntoumanis N: Teacher motivational strategies and student self-determination in physical education. J Educ Psychol 2007, 99:747-760.
• [24]Standage M, Gillison F: Students’ motivational responses toward school physical education and their relationship to general self-esteem and health-related quality of life. Psychol Sport Exerc 2007, 8:704-721.
• [25]Ryan RM, Deci EL: Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemp Educ Psychol 2000, 25:54-67.
• [26]Reeve J, Jang H, Hardre P, Omura M: Providing a rationale in an autonomy-supportive way as a strategy to motivate others during an uninteresting activity. Motivation Emotion 2002, 26:183-207.
• [27]Edmunds J, Ntoumanis N, Duda JL: Testing a self-determination theory-based teaching style intervention in the exercise domain. Eur J Soc Psychol 2008, 38:375-388.
• [28]Roemmich JN, Lambiase MJ, McCarthy TF, Feda DM, Kozlowski KF: Autonomy supportive environments and mastery as basic factors to motivate physical activity in children: a controlled laboratory study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2011, 8:142. BioMed Central Full Text
• [29]Chatzisarantis NLD, Hagger MS: Effects of an intervention based on self-determination theory on self-reported leisure-time physical activity participation. Psychol Health 2008, 24:29-48.
• [30]Cheon SH, Reeve JM, Moon IS: Experimentally based, longitudinally designed, teacher-focused intervention to help physical education teachers be more autonomy supportive toward their students. J Sport Exerc Psychol 2012, 34:365-396.
• [31]Reeve J, Nix G, Diane H: Testing models of the experience of self-determination in intrinsic motivation and the conundrum of choice. J Educ Psychol 2003, 95:75-392.
• [32]Assor A, Kaplan H, Roth G: Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: autonomy-enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviours predicting students engagement in schoolwork. Br J Educ Psychol 2002, 72:261-278.
• [33]Ward J, Wilkinson C, Graser SV, Prusak KA: Effects of choice on student motivation and physical activity behavior in physical education. J Teach Phys Educ 2008, 27:385-398.
• [34]Patall EA, Cooper H, Robinson JC: The effects of choice on intrinsic motivation and related outcomes: a meta-analysis of research findings. Psychol Bull 2008, 134:270-300.
• [35]Campbell MK, Elbourne DR, Altman DG: CONSORT statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. BMJ 2004, 328:702-708.
• [36]Kriemler S, Zahner L, Schindler C, Meyer U, Hartmann T, Hebestreit H, Brunner-La Rocca HP, van Mechelen W, Puder JJ: Effect of school based physical activity programme (KISS) on fitness and adiposity in primary schoolchildren: cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2010, 340:c785.
• [37]Taylor IM, Ntoumanis N: Teacher motivational strategies and student self-determination in physical education. J Educ Psychol 2007, 99:747-760.
• [38]Freedson P, Pober D, Janz KF: Calibration of accelerometer output for children. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005, 37(Suppl):S523-S530.
• [39]Trost SG, Loprinzi PD, Moore R, Pfeiffer KA: Comparison of accelerometer cut points for predicting activity intensity in youth. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2011, 43:1360-1368.
• [40]Ng JYY, Lonsdale C, Hodge K: The Basic Needs Satisfaction in Sport Scale (BNSSS): instrument development and initial validity evidence. Psychol Sport Exerc 2011, 12:257-264.
• [41]McAuley E, Duncan T, Tammen VV: Psychometric properties of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory in a competitive sport setting: a confirmatory factor analysis. Res Q Exerc Sport 1989, 60:48-58.
• [42]Richer SF, Vallerand RJ: Construction et validation de l’echelle du sentiment d’appartenance sociale [Construction and validation of the Feeling of Social Relatedness scale]. Eur Rev Appl Psychol 1998, 48:129-137.
• [43]Guay F, Vallerand RJ, Blanchard CM: On the assessment of situational intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The Situational Motivational Scale (SIMS). Motivation Emotion 2000, 24:175-213.
• [44]Lonsdale C, Sabiston CM, Taylor IM, Ntoumanis N: Measuring student motivation for physical education: examining the psychometric properties of the perceived locus of causality questionnaire and the situational motivation scale. Psychol Sport Exerc 2011, 12:284-292.
• [45]Australian Bureau of Statistics: Socioeconomic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) 2039.0. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra; 2006.