Motivation in Physical Education among Filipino High School
Students
James V. Bailon, Erwin M. Blancaflor, Ma. Joannes Kevin B. Datu-Puda, Karen Jade Dabu, Romeo
R. Rioflorido, and Jonathan Cagas
Philippine Normal University
University of the Philippines Diliman
Keywords: Autonomy Support, Gender Differences, Motivation, Physical Education.
Abstract: Motivating students to participate actively in physical education (PE) is often major concern for physical
education teachers. As physical ability, interest levels, and effortful investment of students within PE classes
can vary among students, understanding the motivational issues in this setting is particularly interesting to
researchers and practitioners alike. One line of research has examined the antecedents of three broad teacher
behaviors, namely provision of autonomy support, structure (i.e. clear expectations and guidelines), and
involvement (i.e. personal interest in students (Ntoumanis, & Standage, 2009). Therefore, the objectives of
this study are: (1) to test the hypothesis that perceived autonomy support from teachers influences students’
motivation in PE, and (2) to examine gender differences in the perceived autonomy support from the teachers.
Two hundred seventy nine (n = 279) students from two public high schools participated. Results of Pearson
R indicated that perceived autonomy support from teacher affects students’ intrinsic motivation, and identified
regulation. In terms of gender differences, results showed that they are no significant differences in the
Perceived Autonomy Support in Physical Education. Overall, results suggest that providing autonomy
supportive learning environment in PE is beneficial in terms of developing more autonomous forms of
motivation in students.
1 INTRODUCTION
Motivating students to participate actively in physical
education (PE) is often major concern for physical
education teachers. The physical ability, interest
levels, and effortful of students within PE classes can
be different among students, understanding the
motivational issues in this setting is particularly
interesting to researchers and practitioners in the field
of teaching. Teachers’ interpersonal style has been
shown to influence students’ motivation in PE
(Reeve, Jang, Carrell, & Barch, 2004). Physical
Education (PE) is significant setting where youth are
taught about lifelong physical activities (Bocarro,
Kanters, Casper, & Forrester, 2008) and it has the
potential to provide children and adolescents with
opportunities to meet the recommended amount of
health-enhancing physical activity to promote
students participation in PE (Trudeau & Sheppard,
2008). With physical inactivity among school
children becoming a health concern worldwide based
on the research of Guthold, Cowan, Autenrieth, Kann,
& Riley, 2010. According to Barkoukis, Hagger,
Lambropoulos, and Tsorbatzoudis (2010),
understanding how to enhance young people’s
motivation in PE is an important research area.
Research suggests that students who are motivated in
PE are most likely to feel motivated in becoming
physically active during their leisure-time as well.
The study aims to examine how a teacher’s
motivational style can affect students’ motivation in
physical education classes. Specifically, it had the
following statement of purposes:
1. to determine how the perceived autonomy
support of teachers is related to high school
student’s motivation in PE;
2. to test if there is a difference in the perceived
autonomy support based on students’ gender.
1.1 Motivation in Physical Education
According to Ryan and Deci (2002), Self-
determination theory proposes that there are three
basic psychological needs which are essential
364
Bailon, J., Blancaflor, E., Datu-Puda, M., Dabu, K., Rioflorido, R. and Cagas, J.
Motivation in Physical Education among Filipino High School Students.
In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education (ICSSHPE 2017) - Volume 1, pages 364-369
ISBN: 978-989-758-317-9
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

rudiments for optimal motivation and well-being.
These psychological needs are the need for
competence (belief in one’s ability to perform a
certain task efficiently and effectively), relatedness
(feeling of belongingness or being connected with
others), and autonomy (perception of being the
initiator and source of one’s behavior). Fulfillment of
experiencing these psychological needs can lead to
cognitive, affective, and behavioral outcomes in PE
(Ntoumanis & Standage, 2009). The research of Ryan
and Deci (2000) says that the failure to address these
needs may lead to decreased motivation and
experience of ill-being or boredom. One way in which
these needs are fulfilled is when the PE teacher
creates an autonomy-supportive learning
environment that proves by the research of Bryan and
Solmon, (2007), and it also promotes self-
development, and exhibits compassion and
consideration towards the students. Specifically, says
that needs fulfillment plays a mediating role in the
relationship between perceived teacher autonomy-
support and students’ self-determined motivation as
agreed on the research of Barkoukis, Hagger,
Lambropoulos, & Tsorbatzoudis, (2010) and
subjective vitality resulted on the research of Taylor
and Lonsdale, (2010). Various studies have examined
the effects of needs fulfillment on students’
motivation and other essential outcomes in PE. One
of the studies from Barkoukis, Hagger,
Lambropoulos, & Tsorbatzoudis (2010) tested the
role of needs fulfillment in the formation of self-
determined motivation in PE and leisure time
contexts.
1.2 Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation
and Learning
Intrinsic motivation refers to behaviors done in the
absence of external impetus that are inherently
interesting and enjoyable which is according to the
research of Ryan and Deci (2000a). Based on
deCharms (1968), when people are intrinsically
motivated they play, explore, and engage in activities
for the inherent fun, challenge, and excitement of
doing so. Such behaviors have an internal perceived
locus of causality. Proven to the research of Deci and
Ryan, 1985, they are experienced as emanating from
the self rather than from external sources, and are
accompanied by feelings of curiosity and interest.
To support the definition of Extrinsic motivation,
according to the research of Ryan and Deci (2000a),
refers to behaviors performed to obtain some outcome
separable from the activity itself. SDT specifies four
distinctive types of extrinsic motivation that vary in
the degree to which they are experienced as
autonomous and that are differentially associated
with classroom practices (e.g. autonomy supportive
versus controlling instruction) and learning outcomes
(e.g. conceptual learning versus rote memorization)
The least autonomous type of extrinsic motivation is
external regulation, whereby behaviors are enacted to
obtain a reward or to avoid a punishment. It was
proven from the research of Vansteenkiste, Ryan, and
Deci (2008), that such behaviors are poorly
maintained once the controlling contingencies (e.g.
grades) have been removed. The next type of extrinsic
motivation is introjected regulation, whereby
behaviors are enacted to satisfy internal
contingencies, such as self-aggrandizement or the
avoidance of self-derogation. It is say in the research
of Nicholls (1984) and Ryan (1982) with introjected
regulation, the student who studied to perform well
on the exam now studies to feel pride or to avoid
feeling guilty for not having studied enough. One
particular type of introjected regulation is ego
involvement, which refers to one’s self-esteem being
contingent on one’s performance. When ego is
involved, a student feels internal pressure to learn so
as to avoid shame or to feel worthy (Niemiec, Ryan,
& Brown, 2008). The most autonomous type of
extrinsic motivation is integrated regulation, whereby
those identified regulations have been produced with
other aspects of the self.
1.3 Self Determination Theory
Based on the research of Deci and Ryan (2000),
Niemiec, Ryan, and Deci (2010), and Ryan and Deci
(2000b), Self Determination Theory is a macro-
theory of human motivation, emotion, and
development that takes interest in factors that either
facilitate or forestall the assimilative and growth-
oriented processes in people.
One of the principles of SDT is that there are three
basic psychological needs namely, universal across
cultures, gender, and developmental stage. According
to Deci & Ryan, 2000, the basic needs are vital for
continuous psychological growth, integrity, and well-
being. Based on the studies of Taylor and Lonsdale
(2010) to observe SDT’s universality hypotheses in
the PE context, the study compared the relationships
between perceived autonomy support, needs
fulfillment, and subjective vitality in individualistic
(UK) and collectivistic (Hong Kong, China) cultures.
Motivation in Physical Education among Filipino High School Students
365

1.4 The Basic Psychological Needs in
Physical Education Scale
In the year 2011, Vlachopoulos, Katarzi and Kontou
research about the Basic Psychological Needs in
Physical Education Scale (BPNPE) Scale; where it is
defined as a short context-specific instrument
designed to measure fulfillment of students’ basic
psychological needs in PE. The said instrument was
anchored to SDT and has only been validated
recently. The instrument has been translated to
German (Heckmann, 2013) and Filipino (Cagas &
Hassandra, 2014) which the researcher has used for
the studies.
1.5 Perceived Autonomy Support of
Teachers
In the field of teaching the practices does not come in
empty. Based on the research of (Ryan & Brown,
2005) one major reason teachers use controlling,
rather than autonomy-supportive, strategies in the
classroom is that external pressures are placed on
them, and this idea has been supported in a growing
number of studies in accordance with SDT. Same as
with the study of Pelletier Séguin-Lévesque &
Legault. (2002) they examined 1st to 12th grade
Canadian teachers and have observed that the more
teachers perceive pressure from above (e.g. having to
comply with an imposed curriculum, pressure toward
performance standards), the less autonomous they are
toward teaching, which in turn was connected with
teachers being more controlling with students.
2 METHOD
Participant were 279 students (105 boys, 174 girls)
from two public high schools. They completed a two-
page questionnaire assessing their perceived levels of
needs fulfillment, autonomy support, and vitality.
Ages ranged from 11 to 19 years. Participants also
indicated their primary spoken language. Three
hundred fifty one answered only one primary
language, 351 of which speaks Filipino (91.88%),
3 MEASURES
Perceived Autonomy Support. Students’ perceptions
of the level of autonomy support provided by their
teacher in physical education classes were measured
using the 15-item; e.g., “I feel that my PE teacher
provides me choices and options”) translated in
Filipino which is Learning Climate Questionnaire
(LCQ; Williams & Deci, 1996).
The Motivation was measured using the
Perceived Locus of Causality Scale (PLOC; Goudas,
Biddle, & Fox, 1994) was employed to assess four
types of behavioral regulation in the physical
education context. All items were rated on a 7-point
Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)
to 7 (strongly agree).
4 PROCEDURE
The data gathering of the researchers was first to get
permit to collect data from the principal of the two
public schools. Then questionnaire were administered
to the participants and data was collected during their
free time. The purpose of the research was explained
to the participants before the questionnaires were
administered. Consent form was also given to the
students that their participation is voluntarily. The
participants were also told that their answers would
not affect their grades, remain confidential unless
requested by the participants and their principal, and
be accessible only to the researchers.
5 DATA ANALYSIS
The statistical analysis that was used to get the
correlational of the types of motivation to perceived
autonomy support of teachers is through Pearson R.
Same as with the students’ gender difference in terms
of motivation in physical education and independent
t-test sample was also used.
6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In this section presents the correlational results
between the types of motivation and perceived
autonomy support of teachers. This shows also
difference in motivation based on student’s gender.
ICSSHPE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education
366

6.1 Perceived Autonomy Support of
Teachers and Students’ Motivation
in Physical Education
Table 1: Mean Score And Response on The Perceived Autonomy Support And Types of Motivation.
In table 1, it presents the result of the response of
students for the Perceived Autonomy Support (PAS)
and the types of motivation in Physical Education.
The Perceived Autonomy Support in general got a
mean score of 5.19 with a standard deviation of 0.89,
means that the students feel that the teachers are
supportive in teaching Physical Education. Then, the
first type of motivation is Intrinsic Motivation which
got a mean score of 5.77 with a standard deviation of
1.15 these means that the students wants to learn PE
because it’s enjoyable and fun, while the second type
of motivation which is Identified Regulation got a
mean score of 5.23 with a standard deviation of 1.09
it means that it is a need for them to learn Physical
Education because it will not only develop their
physical aspects but holistically. The other types of
motivation which are Introjected Regulation got a
mean score of 3.83, External Regulation got a mean
score of 3.86 and Amotivation got a mean score of
2.68. Those three types got a low mean score and it
means that students don’t use ego involvement for the
Introjected, rewards and punishment are not their
motivation in Physical Education for the External
Regulation.
Tabel 2: Correlations between Perceived Autonomy Support Types of Motivation.
Motivation in Physical Education among Filipino High School Students
367

Table 2 shows the result for the correlation
between Perceived Autonomy Support and Types of
Motivation (Intrinsic, Identified Regulation,
Introjected Regulation, External Regulation). It
shows that Perceived Autonomy Support is highly
related to Intrinsic with Pearson R value of 0.79,
p>0.05 and Identified regulation with Pearson r value
of 0.425, p>0.05 which means students have
motivation in PE when teacher makes the class fun
and enjoyable at the same time explained the
importance of PE in their lives. There is a High
Perceived Autonomy Support and Low Introjected
regulation (Pearson r value of 0.038, p<0.05) External
Regulation (Pearson r value of -0.096, p<0.05) which
means the motivation of students in PE is not because
of rewards and punishment.
Figure 1: Correlational Between PAS and Types of
Motivation Based on Students’ Gender.
Based on the figure above the results shows the
correlation of PAS and Types of Motivation based on
gender. The Perceived Autonomy Support with the
Pearson r value of 0.38, p<0.001 for Intrinsic
Motivation, 0.43, p<0.001 shows that the students
have motivation in PE based on their perception that
it’s fun and learning experience and at the same it’s
important for them to learn PE in their daily life which
promotes lifelong fitness while Amotivaton for -0.15,
p>0.001 means that the students are motivated in PE.
6.1.1 Gender Difference in Perceived
Autonomy Support
Based on Table 3 it shows the result of gender
differences on perceived autonomy support. The male
got a mean score of 5.30 while the female 5.25 it
means both are motivated in PE because of the
teachers support and style in teaching PE. Based on
the mean difference of 0.4947 it means that there is
no significant difference in the motivation in PE
based on gender.
Table 3: Group Statisties.
Gender N M SD df Sig.
Mean
Difference
PAS Male 105 5.3 0.861 277 0.662 0.494
Female 174 5.25 0.943
7 CONCLUSION
In conclusion, Physical Education plays an important
role in promoting positive attitudes towards lifelong
physical activity. Our study concludes that Filipino
P.E teachers may use autonomy support strategies to
enhance students’ motivation in PE. It is also
concluded that students’ perception to autonomy
support based on gender signifies the important role
of teachers in PE and the students’ motivation in
promoting lifelong fitness.
REFERENCES
Barkoukis, V., Hagger, M. S., Lambropoulos, G.,
Tsorbatzoudis, H. 2010. Extending the trans-contextual
model in physical education and leisure-time contexts:
Examining the role of basic psychological needs
satisfaction. British Journal of Educational Psychology,
80, 647-670.
Bocarro, J., Kanter, M., Casper, J., Forrester, S. 2008.
School Physical Education, Extracurricular Sports, and
Lifelong Active Living. Journal of Teaching in Physical
Education, 27, 155-166.
Bryan, C. L., Solmon, M. A. 2007. Self-determination in
physical education: Designing class environments to
promote active lifestyles. Journal of Teaching in
Physical Education, 26, 260- 278.
deCharms, R. 1968. Personal Causation. New York:
Academic Press
Deci, E. L. and Ryan, R. M. 1985. Intrinsic Motivation and
Self-determination inHuman Behavior. New York:
Plenum.
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. 2000. The “what” and “why” of
goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination
of behavior, Psychological Inquiry 11:227–68.
ICSSHPE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education
368

Deci, E. L. and Ryan, R. M. 2002. The paradox of
achievement: The harder you push, the worse it gets, in
J. Aronson (ed.), Improving Academic Achievement:
Contributions of Social Psychology, pp. 59–85. New
York: Academic Press.
Flavell, J. H. 1999. Cognitive development: Children’s
knowledge about the mind, in J.T. Spence (ed.), Annual
Review of Psychology, Vol. 50, pp. 21–45. Palo Alto,
CA: Annual Reviews, Inc.
Gagne, M. 2003. The role of autonomy support and
autonomy orientation in prosocial behavior
engagement. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 199–223.
Gagne, M., Ryan, R. M., Bargmann, K. 2003. Autonomy
support and need satisfaction in the motivation and well-
being of gymnasts. Journal of Applied Sport
Psychology, 15, 372–390.
Goudas, M., Biddle, S., Fox, K. 1994. Perceived locus of
causality, goal orientations and perceived competence in
school physical education classes. The British Journal
of Educational Psychology, 64, 453–463. PubMed.
Guthold, R., Cowan, M. J., Autenrieth, C. S., Kann, L.,
Riley, L. M. 2010. Physical activity and sedentary
behavior among schoolchildren: A 34-country
comparison. The Journal of Pediatrics, 157, 43-49.
Nicholls, J.G. 1984. Achievement motivation: Conceptions
of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and
performance, Psychological Review 91: 328–46.
Niemiec, C.P., Ryan, R.M., Brown, K.W. 2008. The role of
awareness and autonomy in quieting the ego: A self-
determination theory perspective, in H.A.
Niemiec, C.P., Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. 2010. Self-
determination theory and the relation of autonomy to
self-regulatory processes and personality development’,
in R. H. Hoyle (ed.), Handbook of Personality and Self-
regulation. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Ntoumanis, N., Standage, M. 2009. Motivation in physical
education classes: A self-determination perspective.
Theory and Research in Education, 7, 194-202.
Pelletier, L.G., Séguin-Lévesque, C. and Legault, L. 2002.
Pressure from above and pressure from below as
determinants of teachers’ motivation and teaching
behaviors’, Journal of Educational Psychology 94: 186–
196.
Ryan, R.M. and Brown, K.W. 2005. Legislating
competence: High-stakes testing policies and their
relations with psychological theories and research, in
A.J. Elliot and C.S. Dweck (eds), Handbook of
Competence and Motivation, pp. 354–72. New York:
Guilford Publications.
Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L. 2002. Overview of self-
determination theory: An organismic dialectical
perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.),
Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3-33).
Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L. 2000. Self-determination theory
and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social
development, and wellbeing. American Psychologist,
55(1), 68-78.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. 2000a. Intrinsic and extrinsic
motivations: Classic definitions and new directions,
Contemporary Educational Psychology 25: 54–67.
Ryan, R.M. 1982. Control and information in the
intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive
evaluation theory, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 43: 450–61.
Ryan, R.M., Connell, J.P. 1989. Perceived locus of
causality and internalization: Examining reasons for
acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 57, 749–761. PubMed.
Reeve, J., Jang, H., Hardre, P. and Omura, M. 2002.
Providing a rationale in an autonomy-supportive way as
a strategy to motivate others during an uninteresting
activity, Motivation and Emotion 26: 183–207.
Taylor, I. M., Lonsdale, C. 2010. Cultural differences in the
relationships among autonomy support, psychological
need satisfaction, subjective vitality, and effort in
British and Chinese physical education. Journal of Sport
& Exercise Psychology, 32, 655-673.
Trudeau, F., Sheppard, R. J. 2008. Physical education,
school physical activity, school sports, and academic
performance. International Journal of Behavioral
Nutrition and Physical Activity, 5(10).
Vansteenkiste, M., Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. 2008. Self-
determination theory and the explanatory role of
psychological needs in human well-being, in L. Bruni,
F. Comin and M. Pugno (eds), Capabilities and
Happiness, pp. 187-223. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Vlachopoulos, S. P. 2012. The role of self-determination
theory variables in predicting middle school students’
subjective vitality in physical education. Hellenic
Journal of Psychology, 9, 179-204.
Williams, G., Deci, E. 1996. Internalization of
biopsychological values by medical students: A test of
selfdetermination theory. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 70, 767–779. PubMed.
Motivation in Physical Education among Filipino High School Students
369