The Influence of state motivation, content relevance and affective learning on high school students' intentions to use class content following completion of compulsory physical education

Journal of Teaching in Physical Education

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 231-247

  Webster, Collin ^a   Mîndrilǎ, Diana ^a   Weaver, Glenn ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Instructional communication; Secondary teaching; Structural equation modeling; Student perceptions

Indexed keywords

EID: 80053087378     PISSN: 02735024     EISSN: 15432769     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1123/jtpe.30.3.231     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Allen, M., Witt, P.L., & Wheeless, L. (2006). The role of teacher immediacy as a motivational factor in student learning: Using meta-analysis to test a causal model. Communication Education, 55, 21-31.
2. Bentler, P.M., & Chou, C.P. (1987). Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociological Methods & Research, 16, 78-117.
3. Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural equation modeling with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
4. Byrne, B.M. (1998). Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5. Chen, A. (2001). A theoretical conceptualization for motivation research in physical education: An integrated perspective. Quest, 53, 35-58.
6. Chesebro, J.L., & McCroskey, J.C. (2000). The relationship between students' reports of learning and their actual recall of lecture material. Communication Education, 49, 297-301.
7. Chesebro, J.L., & McCroskey, J.C. (2001). The relationship of teacher clarity and immediacy with student state receiver apprehension, affect, and cognitive learning. Communication Education, 50, 59-68.
8. Christophel, D.M. (1990). The relationships among teacher immediacy behaviors, student motivation, and learning. Communication Education, 37, 323-340.
9. Finney, S.J., & DiStefano, C. (2006). Nonnormal and Categorical Data in Structural Equation Modeling. Greenwich, Connecticut: Information Age Publishing.
10. Finney, S., & Pike, J. (2008). Content relevance in case-study teaching: The alumni connection and its affect on student motivation. Journal of Education for Business, 83, 251-257.
11. Frymier, A.B. (1994). A model of immediacy in the classroom. Communication Quarterly, 42, 133-144.
12. Frymier, A.B., & Houser, M. (2000). The Teacher-Student Relationship as an Interpersonal Relationship. Communication Education, 49, 207-219.
13. Frymier, A.B., & Shulman, G.M. (1995). "What's in it for me?" : Increasing content relevance to enhance students' motivation. Communication Education, 44, 40-50.
14. Gusthart, L., Kelly, I., & Rink, J. (1997). The validity of the QMTPS as a measure of teacher effectiveness. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 16, 196-210.
15. Hagger, M., Chatzisarantis, N., & Biddle, S.J. (2001). The influence of self-efficacy and past behavior on physical activity intentions of young people. Journal of Sports Sciences, 19, 771-725.
16. Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., & Black, W.C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
17. Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J.L., & Rapson, R.L. (1993). Emotional contagion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2, 96-99.
18. Johnson, S.L. (2010).A question of time: Cross-sectional versus longitudinal study designs. Pediatrics, 31, 250-251.
19. Joreskog, K.G., & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL VIII, User's Reference Guide. Chicago, Illinois: Scientific Software.
20. Keller, J.M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories: An overview of their current status (pp. 383-434). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21. Keller, J.M. (1987). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn. Performance and Instruction, 26, 1-7.
22. Kelly, D.H., & Gorham, J. (1988). Effects of immediacy on recall of information. Communication Education, 37, 198-207.
23. Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S., & Masia, B.B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook II: The affective domain. New York: David McKay.
24. Kwak, C. (1993). The initial effects of various task presentation conditions on students' performance of the lacrosse throw. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina, Columbia.
25. Mardia, K.V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 36, 519-530.
26. McCroskey, J.C. (1994). Assessment of affect toward communication and affect toward instruction in communication. In S. Morreale and M. Brooks (Eds.), 1994 SCA summer conference proceedings and prepared remarks (pp. 55-71). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
27. McDowell, E., & McDowell, C. (1990). An investigation of verbal and nonverbal teacher immediacy behaviors, homophily, interpersonal solidarity, student attentiveness and student learning at the senior high school level. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Convention, Dublin, Ireland.
28. Mehrabian, A. (1971). Silent messages. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
29. Mottet, T.P., & Beebe, S.A. (2006). Foundations of instructional communication. In T.P. Mottet, V.P. Richmond, & J.C. McCroskey (Eds.), Handbook of instructional communication: Rhetorical and relational perspectives (pp. 3-32). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
30. Mottet, T.P., Garza, R., Beebe, S.A., Houser, M.L., Jurrells, S., & Furler, L. (2008). Instructional communication predictors of ninth-grade students' affective learning in math and science. Communication Education, 57, 333-355.
31. Mottet, T.P., & Richmond, V.P. (1998). New is not necessarily better: A reexamination of affective learning measurement. Communication Research Reports, 15, 370-378.
32. National Association for Physical Education and Sport [NASPE], (2004). Moving into the future: National standards for physical education (2nd Ed.). Reston, VA: Author.
33. Muddiman, A., & Frymier, A.B. (2009). What is relevant? Student perceptions of relevance strategies in college classrooms. Communication Studies, 60, 130-146.
34. Netemeyer, R., Bentler, P., Bagozzi, R., Cudeck, R., Cote, J., Lehmann, D., et al. (2001). Structural Equations Modeling. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 10, 83-100.
35. Raykov, T. (1997). Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 173-184.
36. Richmond, V.P. (1990). Communication in the classroom: Power and motivation. Communication Education, 39, 181-195.
37. Rigdon, E.E. (1996). CFI versus RMSEA: A comparison of two fit indexes for structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 3, 369-379.
38. Rodriguez, J.L., Plax, T.G., & Kearney, P. (1996). Clarifying the relationship between teacher nonverbal immediacy and student cognitive learning: Affective learning as the central causal mediator. Communication Education, 45, 293-305.
39. Schumacker, R.E., & Lomax, R.G. (2004). A beginner' guide to structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
40. Standage, M., Gillison, F., & Treasure, D.C. (2007). Self-determination and motivation in physical education. In M.S. Hagger & N.L.D. Chatzisarantis (Eds.), Self-determination theory in exercise and sport (pp. 71-85). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
41. Subramanium, R. (2009). Motivational effects of interest on student engagement and learning in physical education. International Journal of Physical Education, 46, 11-19.
42. Webster, C.A. (2010). Relating student recall to expert and novice teachers' instructional communication: An investigation using receiver selectivity theory. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 15, 419-433.
43. Webster, C.A., Gozález, S., & Harvey, R. (in press).Physical education teachers' self-reported communication of content relevance. Physical Educator.