Study Protocol of a Non-randomized Controlled Trial on a Circumplex Model-based Motivational Training Program for Pre-service Physical Education Teachers
Phase: NA
Conditions: Teaching Styles, Motivation, Competence, Pre-service Teachers
Sponsor: Universidad de Zaragoza

Study protocol of a non-randomized controlled trial on a circumplex model-based 
motivational training program for pre-service physical education teachers 
 
20/03/2025

Abstract 
1 
Physical Education Teacher Education is crucial, as it directly influences how pre-
2 
service Physical Education teachers will teach, motivate, and engage their future students. 
3 
However, training programs that foster motivating teaching styles while minimizing 
4 
demotivating ones remain scarce, particularly during initial teacher education. This study 
5 
presents the protocol for a non-randomized controlled trial evaluating a motivational-based 
6 
training program for pre-service Physical Education teachers, grounded in Self-Determination 
7 
Theory and the circumplex model. The program, embedded in a Master’s in Physical Education 
8 
Teacher Education, consists of theoretical and practical training to foster motivating teaching 
9 
styles and minimize demotivating ones. The study will involve at least 38 pre-service teachers, 
10 
divided into an experimental group (n = 19) and a control group (n = 19). The experimental 
11 
group will participate in a 14-hour training program combining theoretical and practical 
12 
components. The control group will follow the standard Physical Education Teacher Education 
13 
curriculum. A quasi-experimental pre-post design with a mixed-methods approach will be used. 
14 
Quantitative assessments will measure changes in perceived competence, motivation for 
15 
teaching, and (de)motivating teaching styles, while qualitative focus groups will provide in-
16 
depth insights into participants’ experiences and program applicability. To ensure objectivity, 
17 
independent researchers will conduct assessments, and external experts will moderate the focus 
18 
groups. Findings will contribute empirical evidence on the effectiveness of Self-Determination 
19 
Theory-based interventions in initial teacher education, informing curriculum development and 
20 
supporting the advancement of evidence-based pedagogical training in Physical Education. 
21 
Keywords: Self-Determination Theory, (de)motivating teaching styles, physical 
22 
education teacher education, quasi-experimental study, mixed-methods research 
23 

Introduction 
24 
Teaching begins with learning, and what is learned inevitably shapes both what and how 
25 
it is taught (1). In this regard, Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) programs play a 
26 
critical role in preparing future teachers by equipping them with theoretical knowledge and 
27 
practical competencies (2,3). Among these competencies, one of the most crucial is the ability 
28 
to adopt a motivating teaching style, which refers to how teachers structure their lessons, 
29 
interact and behave with their students, and create learning environments that foster the quality 
30 
of students’ motivation (4). Recently, the appearance of the circumplex model (5,6), grounded 
31 
in Self-Determination Theory (SDT; (7), provides a comprehensive framework for 
32 
understanding the various (de)motivating teaching styles (i.e., autonomy support, structure, 
33 
control, and chaos) that shape physical education (PE) teachers’ pedagogical practices. These 
34 
styles significantly influence students’ motivational processes, leading to both positive and 
35 
negative outcomes in PE (8,9). 
36 
Although various SDT-based training programs have been developed to enhance 
37 
motivating teaching styles among in-service PE teachers (10), research on similar interventions 
38 
for pre-service teachers remains scarce (11–13). In particular, there is a lack of studies 
39 
integrating the circumplex model to conceptualize and refine motivational teaching approaches 
40 
during initial teacher education. Addressing this gap, the present protocol study aims to design 
41 
a teacher training program grounded in SDT and the circumplex model, embedded within 
42 
PETE, designed to foster motivating teaching styles while reducing demotivating ones. 
43 
Motivating and demotivating teaching styles of the circumplex model 
44 
According to SDT (7), PE teachers play a pivotal role in shaping students’ motivation 
45 
through the influence that their (de)motivating teaching styles and approaches have on students’ 
46 
basic psychological needs (BPN). These teaching styles and approaches can either support or 
47 
thwart students’ BPN (9). These needs include autonomy (i.e., the perception of being the origin 
48 

of one’s actions), competence (i.e., feeling effective in interactions and tasks required by the 
49 
context), and relatedness (i.e., the sense of connection with significant others) (7). To better 
50 
understand how these styles manifest in PE settings, the SDT-based circumplex model (5,14) 
51 
offers a structured framework that classifies teaching styles along two intersecting axes: a 
52 
vertical axis representing high versus low directiveness (exercised by the teacher in interaction 
53 
with their students), and a horizontal axis reflecting the extent to which teachers either support 
54 
or thwart students’ BPN. The intersection of these axes delineates four primary (de)motivating 
55 
teaching styles (i.e., autonomy support, structure, control, and chaos), each one further 
56 
subdivided into two specific approaches (i.e., participative, attuning, guiding, clarifying, 
57 
demanding, domineering, abandoning, awaiting). 
58 
The autonomy-supportive style (i.e., need-supportive and low directiveness) encourages 
59 
students to take the initiative and assume responsibility for their learning. This style 
60 
incorporates a participative approach, allowing students to make meaningful decisions 
61 
regarding their learning processes, and/or an attuning approach, which aligns tasks with 
62 
students’ interests while emphasizing their relevance (5,14). Complementary, the structuring 
63 
style (i.e., need-supportive and high directiveness) emphasizes guidance and supporting the 
64 
learning process to enhance students’ sense of competence. This style includes a guiding 
65 
approach, characterized by the provision of constructive feedback and instructional support, 
66 
and/or a clarifying approach, which ensures that students clearly understand the learning goals 
67 
and expectations (5,14). 
68 
In contrast, the controlling style (i.e., low need support and high directiveness) exerts 
69 
internal and external pressures on students to think, act, or perform in specific ways. This style 
70 
is associated with a demanding approach, which relies on sanctions, coercion, or extrinsic 
71 
incentives, and/or a domineering approach, which induces feelings of guilt, shame, or anxiety 
72 
(5,14). Finally, the chaotic style (i.e., low need support and low directiveness) reflects a lack of 
73 

structured guidance and an indifferent teaching attitude. This style is characterized by an 
74 
abandoning approach, where teachers neglect their students and delegate full responsibility for 
75 
their learning, and/or an awaiting approach, marked by a lack of planning, granting excessive 
76 
freedom, and passively observing outcomes (5,14). 
77 
In their teaching, PE teachers do not adopt a single isolated teaching style, as they often 
78 
combine various (de)motivating teaching styles (15–20). Teachers who predominantly use 
79 
need-supportive styles (i.e., autonomy support and structure/competence support) while 
80 
minimizing need-thwarting styles (i.e., control and chaos) tend to promote greater need 
81 
satisfaction (and lower need frustration), higher autonomous motivation, and lower controlled 
82 
motivation and amotivation among their students. These outcomes directly enhance students’ 
83 
learning, enjoyment of PE lessons, and intentions to engage in physical activity outside school 
84 
(9,21). Conversely, teachers who rely primarily on controlling and chaotic teaching styles (with 
85 
low levels of need-supportive ones) tend to produce the opposite effects, leading to lower need 
86 
satisfaction and autonomous motivation, coupled with higher need frustration, controlled 
87 
motivation, and amotivation among students, ultimately resulting in lower engagement, 
88 
enjoyment, learning outcomes, and intentions to be physically active (9). Additionally, some 
89 
teachers blend autonomy-supportive and structuring approaches with controlling strategies, 
90 
which can lead to students’ motivational cost in both the short and long term (e.g., lower need 
91 
satisfaction and less self-determined motivation) (15–20). While research often examines the 
92 
effects of these teaching styles independently, in real educational settings, teachers frequently 
93 
apply them in varying degrees rather than as fixed categories. A PE teacher may, for example, 
94 
predominantly use autonomy-supportive strategies but occasionally resort to controlling styles 
95 
in response to specific student behaviors or classroom dynamics. This fluidity highlights the 
96 
importance of not only fostering motivating teaching styles but also systematically reducing 
97 
demotivating styles. Recognizing the profound benefits associated with need-supportive 
98 

teaching styles, there has been a recent increase in the implementation of SDT-based training 
99 
programs designed to enhance PE teachers’ motivating teaching styles. However, research on 
100 
how to effectively reduce the use of demotivating styles remains scarce, although teachers may 
101 
adopt both motivating and demotivating styles within the same instructional setting (20). Future 
102 
interventions should, therefore, not only emphasize the promotion of need-supportive styles but 
103 
also include targeted strategies to help teachers identify and unlearn demotivating styles, 
104 
ultimately guiding them toward the best possible teaching profile. 
105 
What determines pre-service PE teachers’ (de)motivating teaching styles?  
106 
SDT posits that the satisfaction or frustration of BPN (i.e., autonomy, competence, and 
107 
relatedness) determines an individual’s psychological and motivational development (7,22). 
108 
This framework extends across various contexts, including the professional development of PE 
109 
teachers (23). Additionally, SDT conceptualizes motivation along a self-determination 
110 
continuum, influencing how individuals pursue and develop their professional roles (22). At 
111 
the highly self-determined end of this continuum lies autonomous motivation, which 
112 
encompasses intrinsic motivation (e.g., teaching PE for the inherent enjoyment it brings) and 
113 
identified regulation (e.g., teaching PE due to its perceived value for students and personal 
114 
development). As self-determination decreases, controlled motivation emerges, characterized 
115 
by introjected regulation (e.g., teaching PE to avoid feelings of guilt or enhance self-esteem) 
116 
and external regulation (e.g., teaching PE in exchange for external rewards such as salary or 
117 
vacation benefits). At the least self-determined end of the continuum is amotivation, defined by 
118 
the absence of both autonomous and controlled motivations to engage in PE teaching (7).  
119 
For pre-service PE teachers, the process of perceiving how the teaching profession 
120 
satisfies or frustrates their needs for autonomy and relatedness can often be complex. For 
121 
instance, envisioning the extent of decision-making freedom or the quality of interactions with 
122 
colleagues and students may be challenging, as it requires direct teaching experience. 
123 

Nevertheless, after completing mandatory practicum periods (e.g., in Spain, a minimum of six 
124 
weeks), pre-service teachers can better project how skilled and effective they feel (i.e., 
125 
competence need) in teaching PE.  Previous research suggests that competence satisfaction 
126 
during PETE programs has predicted autonomous motivation for teaching PE, which, in turn, 
127 
fosters the intention to implement autonomy-supportive (i.e., participative and attuning) and 
128 
structuring (i.e., guiding and clarifying) teaching strategies. In contrast, competence frustration 
129 
during PETE is linked to increased controlled motivation or amotivation, which makes adopting 
130 
controlling (i.e., demanding and domineering) and chaotic (i.e., abandoning and awaiting) 
131 
teaching strategies more likely (14,24). Consequently, it seems essential for pre-service PE 
132 
teachers to receive training during PETE on how to teach and interact with students in ways 
133 
that enhance their sense of competence. This, in turn, can promote a more self-determined 
134 
motivation for teaching, enhancing their intention to implement motivating teaching approaches 
135 
(i.e., participative, attuning, guiding, and clarifying) while also reducing the use of 
136 
demotivating approaches (i.e., demanding, domineering, abandoning, and awaiting) (24). 
137 
Previous SDT-based training programs  
138 
A systematic review by Reeve & Cheon (10) demonstrated that in-service PE teachers 
139 
can learn and effectively implement autonomy-supportive teaching strategies. While most 
140 
training programs have focused on autonomy support (i.e., participative and attuning 
141 
approaches), recent research has also highlighted the importance of structuring strategies (i.e., 
142 
guiding and clarifying) and, to a lesser extent, the role of controlling (i.e., demanding and 
143 
domineering) and chaotic (i.e., abandoning and awaiting) teaching approaches (10). Several 
144 
studies have shown that combining autonomy support with structuring strategies enhances 
145 
student motivation and learning outcomes. Teachers who integrate clear expectations and 
146 
constructive feedback within an autonomy-supportive framework promote greater BPN 
147 
satisfaction, self-determined motivation, and engagement (25–27). Beyond autonomy-support 
148 

and structuring teaching approaches, interventions aimed at reducing controlling teaching 
149 
approaches have also improved student motivation and classroom climate (28,29). A more 
150 
comprehensive approach is seen in the training program by García-Cazorla et al.  (30), which 
151 
was the first to integrate the circumplex model into PE teacher training. Unlike previous 
152 
programs that focused primarily on autonomy support, this initiative targeted all eight 
153 
(de)motivating teaching approaches, providing a holistic framework to enhance motivating 
154 
styles while reducing demotivating ones. 
155 
Regarding pre-service teachers, research on the design, implementation, and outcomes 
156 
of intervention programs aimed at improving (de)motivating teaching styles remains scarce. 
157 
Similar to the training of in-service teachers, existing programs for pre-service teachers have 
158 
primarily focused on promoting autonomy support (or even reducing control), with less 
159 
attention paid to structuring and chaotic styles. For example, Perlman (11) conducted a 
160 
randomized controlled trial featuring a two-week online training program for pre-service PE 
161 
teachers. The program yielded positive results, enhancing pre-service teachers’ ability to 
162 
support student autonomy, reducing their reliance on controlling teaching styles, and ultimately 
163 
enhancing students’ quality of motivation during their practicum lessons. Similarly, Großmann 
164 
et al. (13) implemented a face-to-face intervention with pre-service biology teachers, focusing 
165 
on understanding and applying autonomy-supportive teaching in future practice. The 
166 
intervention revealed positive outcomes, enhancing both their knowledge of autonomy-
167 
supportive teaching styles and their intention to apply them in their future teaching. In both 
168 
training programs with pre-service teachers, the intervention was the same for all participants 
169 
(11,13). However, tailoring PETE programs to individual needs seems crucial, as each pre-
170 
service teacher possesses distinct characteristics (e.g., age, gender) and a unique motivational 
171 
background, leading to diverse teaching profiles and varying combinations of teaching 
172 
approaches (14,24). Therefore, PETE programs should adopt more personalized training 
173 

methods that allow pre-service teachers to refine their motivating approaches while reducing 
174 
their reliance on demotivating strategies.  
175 
Towards more individualized and effective motivational training programs 
176 
For this purpose, observational methodologies such as video-analysis tools are crucial 
177 
for delivering constructive and personalized feedback, as they allow pre-service teachers to 
178 
objectively review their (de)motivating teaching styles, identify specific strengths and 
179 
weaknesses, and engage in self-regulated learning (31). Additionally, motivational training 
180 
programs should incorporate a structured theoretical phase, where pre-service teachers are 
181 
introduced to SDT and the circumplex model, followed by practical sessions that closely 
182 
simulate real-life teaching experiences. A particularly effective method is microteaching, in 
183 
which pre-service teachers receive targeted feedback on their teaching approaches, allowing 
184 
them to refine their strategies through iterative practice (11,32). This is especially important 
185 
because pre-service teachers often lack prior teaching experience, making experiential learning 
186 
a crucial component of their training (24).  
187 
Furthermore, Reeve & Cheon (33) emphasize that teacher training should not only focus 
188 
on instructional teaching styles but also on perspective-taking, helping educators understand 
189 
students' psychological needs before applying motivational strategies. Similarly, research 
190 
suggests that the effectiveness of training programs is enhanced when the trainers themselves 
191 
adopt a congruent teaching style. When trainers/instructors model motivating teaching 
192 
strategies and avoid demotivating ones, pre-service teachers understand and appreciate the 
193 
value of these pedagogical practices better (32). This underscores the importance of aligning 
194 
theoretical training with practical demonstrations to maximize the impact of PETE 
195 
interventions. 
196 

The present protocol study 
197 
Building on the demonstrated benefits of SDT-based training programs in enhancing teachers’ 
198 
motivating teaching styles, previous research has shown that these interventions contribute to 
199 
greater student need satisfaction, enhance motivation for PE, improve well-being and 
200 
engagement with the subject, and tend to strengthen students’ intention to participate in 
201 
physical activity outside of school (10). Despite these positive outcomes, similar training 
202 
initiatives remain scarce within PETE. To address this gap, the present mixed-method study 
203 
outlines the protocol of a PETE-integrated training program grounded in SDT and the 
204 
circumplex model. The program is designed to equip pre-service PE teachers with the 
205 
knowledge and skills to implement motivating teaching approaches while minimizing 
206 
demotivating teaching approaches. It is hypothesized that pre-service teachers will: (H1) 
207 
perceive the training program positively; (H2) show an increase in the use of motivating 
208 
teaching approaches (i.e., participative, attuning, guiding, and clarifying) alongside a decrease 
209 
in demotivating teaching approaches (i.e., demanding, domineering, abandoning, and 
210 
awaiting); and (H3) enhance their perceived competence, which, in turn, will foster greater 
211 
autonomous motivation and decreased controlled motivation and amotivation for teaching 
212 
PE. 
213 
Method 
214 
Context, design, and randomization 
215 
This study will be conducted at a Spanish University, within the framework of the 
216 
nationally standardized 60-credit Master’s (MSc) degree in PETE, after obtaining a Bachelor’s 
217 
(BSc) degree in Physical Activity and Sport Sciences. This MSc program is a mandatory 
218 
qualification for individuals aspiring to teach PE in secondary schools across Spain. The 
219 
program is structured into two distinct semesters. The first semester (i.e., September-January) 
220 
focuses on theoretical training, covering pedagogy and curriculum design. The second semester 
221 

(i.e., January-June) emphasizes practical application in PE contexts. The program concludes 
222 
with a 7-weeks practicum where pre-service teachers gain hands-on teaching experience in 
223 
secondary schools.  
224 
Given the structural constraints of the MSc program, random assignment to 
225 
experimental conditions is not feasible. Therefore, this study will employ a quasi-experimental 
226 
pre-post design, incorporating an experimental group and a control group. They will undergo a 
227 
three-phase assessment: pre-test, intermediate-test (only for the experimental group), and post-
228 
test. The study follows a mixed-methods approach, integrating quantitative and qualitative 
229 
analyses to capture the intervention's measurable outcomes and contextual nuances.  
230 
The training program aligns with the progressive structure of the MSc degree. During 
231 
the first semester, pre-service PE teachers in the experimental group will receive theoretical and 
232 
practical training based on SDT and the circumplex model. This phase will establish 
233 
foundational knowledge of (de)motivating teaching strategies and their effects on student 
234 
motivation and engagement. In the second semester, participants will apply this knowledge by 
235 
designing PE lesson plans that integrate these strategies and will implement them during their 
236 
practicum. Meanwhile, pre-service PE teachers in the control group will follow the standard 
237 
MSc curriculum without exposure to the intervention (see Figure 1). More details about the 
238 
training program's structure, content, and implementation can be found in the “Pre-service PE 
239 
teachers’ training program” section.  
240 
The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the [omitted for peer review]. 
241 
 
242 
<INSERT FIGURE 1 ABOUT HERE, PLEASE> 
243 
 
244 
Sample size calculation 
245 
The sample size for this quasi-experimental protocol study was calculated using R 
246 
Studio to ensure sufficient statistical power for detecting significant effects of the intervention. 
247 

The calculation was based on a repeated-measures design, assuming a large effect size (d = 
248 
0.8), an 80% statistical power, and a significance level (α = .05), aligning with standard 
249 
practices in educational research (34). To account for the inherent variability and potential 
250 
selection biases associated with quasi-experimental designs, a 20% adjustment was applied to 
251 
the initial estimate (35). Additionally, a 10% allowance for anticipated participant dropout was 
252 
incorporated over the study period. After these adjustments, the final target sample size was set 
253 
at 19 participants per group (i.e., 38 in total). This ensures adequate statistical power to detect 
254 
meaningful differences while mitigating the limitations posed by participant attrition and the 
255 
study design. 
256 
Participants and recruitment 
257 
A minimum of 38 pre-service PE teachers (19 in the control group and 19 in the 
258 
experimental group) will participate in the study. Given the institutional constraints of the MSc 
259 
program and the intention to integrate the training program within MSc in PETE, the training 
260 
will be delivered by university-affiliated faculty members with extensive experience in SDT 
261 
and the circumplex model. As a result, non-randomized convenience sampling was selected as 
262 
the most feasible approach. Pre-service teachers must be drawn from two distinct cohorts to 
263 
prevent contamination between the groups. This can be achieved by collecting data from the 
264 
control group in one academic year and from the experimental group in the subsequent year or 
265 
by selecting participants from two different universities. Splitting a single class into separate 
266 
conditions, where only some students receive the training while others do not, was deemed 
267 
ethically inappropriate given the pedagogical implications of the program. 
268 
While participation in the training program will be mandatory for students in the 
269 
experimental group (as it is embedded within the MSc in PETE), data collection will remain 
270 
voluntary and anonymous. However, participants must meet specific inclusion criteria to be 
271 
included in the study: (1) attending 100% of the training program sessions, (2) completing study 
272 

questionnaires three times (i.e., pre-test, intermediate-test, and post-test), and (3) participating 
273 
in a focus group at the end of the study. 
274 
Measures 
275 
Questionnaires 
276 
The following variables of pre-service PE teachers will be measured through Google 
277 
Forms at three time points: before the training program (T1; pre-test—at the beginning of the 
278 
MSc in PETE), during the program (T2; intermediate test—at the end of the first part of the 
279 
training program), and after completing the program (T3; post-test—at the end of the MSc in 
280 
PETE practicum) (see Figure 1). 
281 
Socio-demographic variables  
282 
Age and gender will be self-reported by pre-service PE teachers. 
283 
Competence satisfaction and frustration towards PE teaching 
284 
The Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (BPNSFS; Chen et al., 
285 
2015) will be used to assess pre-service PE teachers' self-perceived teaching competence. 
286 
Starting with the phrase “As a future PE teacher…”, the four items measuring competence 
287 
satisfaction (e.g., “I feel competent as a PE teacher”) and the four items measuring competence 
288 
frustration (e.g., “I have serious doubts about whether I can do things well as a PE teacher”) 
289 
will be included. Participants will respond using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 
290 
(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). 
291 
Motivation to teach  
292 
The Spanish version of the Motivation Scale for Teaching in Secondary Education 
293 
(EME-ES; (37), adapted to the PE teaching context, will be used to assess pre-service PE 
294 
teachers’ self-perceived motivation to teach. This scale begins with the prompt: “I get involved 
295 
in teaching Physical Education because...” followed by 19 items that measure various forms 
296 
of motivation. Specifically, it includes intrinsic motivation (4 items, e.g., “Teaching is fun”), 
297 

identified regulation (4 items, e.g., “Teaching helps me learn new things”), introjected 
298 
regulation (4 items, e.g., “I want to give others the impression that I am a good teacher”), 
299 
external regulation (4 items, e.g., “It is assumed that I should do this”), and amotivation (3 
300 
items, e.g., “I don’t know why I am a PE teacher, it is a useless job”). Participants will respond 
301 
using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).  
302 
(De)motivating teaching styles and approaches 
303 
The Spanish version of the Situations in School Questionnaire-Physical Education (SIS-
304 
PE; Burgueño, Abós, et al., 2024) will be used to evaluate pre-service PE teachers’ perception 
305 
of their (de)motivating teaching approaches. The SIS-PE comprises 12 typical teaching 
306 
situations consisting of four items each (i.e., 48 items in total). The 48 items are categorized 
307 
according to the four overarching teaching styles. Autonomy-supportive style includes 
308 
participative (four items) and attuning approaches (eight items). Structuring approaches 
309 
comprise guiding (seven items) and clarifying approaches (five items). Control style is divided 
310 
into demanding (seven items) and domineering approaches (five items). Chaotic style 
311 
encompasses abandoning (eight items) and awaiting approaches (four items). An example of a 
312 
situation is: “In preparing for your class, you develop a lesson plan. Your priority is to...”, with 
313 
four ways of answering: (1) “Offer challenges to the best students and provide sufﬁcient support 
314 
to exceptional students throughout their learning” (i.e., guiding approach); (2) “Don’t plan the 
315 
lesson too much. It will unfold on its own” (i.e., awaiting approach); (3) “Propose exercises 
316 
that are pleasant, interesting, or very attractive” (i.e., attuning approach); (4) “Propose a lesson 
317 
plan for all students to follow. There are no exceptions or excuses” (i.e., demanding approach). 
318 
Participants will respond using a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (It does not describe 
319 
me at all) to 7 (It describes me perfectly). 
320 

Quality of the training program 
321 
In line with previous intervention studies on both in-service (30,32,38) and pre-service 
322 
PE teachers (13), the quality of the training program will be assessed at the end of the first phase 
323 
(T2). For this purpose, the experimental group will complete a Google Forms questionnaire 
324 
evaluating four key aspects of the training program: (1) the applicability of the acquired 
325 
knowledge in real teaching contexts; (2) the alignment of the intervention program with their 
326 
personal and professional interests; (3) the perceived usefulness of the content in their future 
327 
teaching practice; and (4) the scalability of the training program for their long-term professional 
328 
development. Participants will respond using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) 
329 
to 5 (strongly agree). Additionally, they must justify their responses through open-ended 
330 
comments, providing qualitative insights into their perceptions of the training. 
331 
Focus groups 
332 
A focus group will be conducted at the end of the study, immediately after completing 
333 
the post-test questionnaires (T3). The primary objective of this session is to gain deeper insights 
334 
into pre-service PE teachers’ perceptions of the intervention program. The discussion will focus 
335 
on three key areas: (1) their experiences related to changes in their motivational teaching styles, 
336 
motivation for teaching, and perceived competence throughout the program; (2) the perceived 
337 
applicability of the strategies learned and their feasibility in real-world PE teaching contexts; 
338 
and (3) the challenges encountered when implementing these strategies during their practicum. 
339 
A general assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the training program will also be made. 
340 
The focus group will be moderated by an expert in PE teaching instruction, the SDT 
341 
framework, and qualitative methodology. To foster open and honest discussions among pre-
342 
service PE teachers, the trainers will not be present during the session. The discussion will 
343 
follow a semi-structured format, ensuring a balance between guided questions and participants’ 
344 
spontaneous contributions (see Table 1). The session will begin with a brief introduction, 
345 

outlining the study’s objectives and procedures. The moderator will lead the discussion, 
346 
supported by a co-moderator responsible for managing logistics, taking notes, and overseeing 
347 
the recording equipment. At the end of the session, the co-moderator will summarize the key 
348 
discussion points and invite participants to confirm the accuracy of the summary or provide 
349 
additional insights. The focus group will be conducted in a comfortable and neutral setting, 
350 
lasting approximately 50 minutes. All sessions will be videotaped and transcribed for in-depth 
351 
analysis. 
352 
Ensuring objectivity and minimizing bias in the evaluation process 
353 
To reduce potential biases associated with the trainers also being evaluators, the 
354 
assessment of pre-service teachers' competence, motivation to teach, and (de)motivating 
355 
teaching styles will be conducted by independent researchers who are not involved in delivering 
356 
the training. Additionally, the focus group sessions will be moderated by an external expert in 
357 
PE teacher education and SDT, ensuring that participants feel free to share their experiences 
358 
without influence from their trainers. The trainers will not participate in these sessions or have 
359 
access to individual responses until after the data collection phase is completed. This approach 
360 
aims to enhance the objectivity of the evaluation and minimize the potential influence of social 
361 
desirability biases in participants' responses.  
362 
Pre-service PE teachers’ training program 
363 
Experimental group 
364 
The intervention for the experimental group will consist of two phases: (1) a teacher-
365 
training phase, comprising five face-to-face sessions, and (2) a follow-up phase, where pre-
366 
service PE teachers will design and apply SDT-based strategies during their MSc practicum 
367 
(see Figure 2). 
368 
The first phase of the training program will take place within the MSc in PETE subject 
369 
titled “[omitted for peer review],” scheduled during the first semester (i.e., September-January) 
370 

in the first three weeks of November as part of the instructional design module. The first phase 
371 
of the program consists of 14 face-to-face hours over three weeks, with sessions structured as 
372 
follows: Tuesdays (16:00-18:00, two-hour sessions) and Wednesdays (15:00-19:00, four-hour 
373 
sessions) in the first two weeks, concluding with a final two-hour session on Tuesday (16:00-
374 
18:00) in the third week. The primary aim of this phase is to enhance pre-service PE teachers’ 
375 
autonomy-supportive and structuring teaching styles while reducing controlling and chaotic 
376 
styles, following SDT and the circumplex model. Two university teachers with expertise in 
377 
SDT-based training programs for PE teachers will lead the sessions. It is essential that trainers 
378 
model a congruent teaching style (32), adopting motivating instructional strategies that support 
379 
autonomy and structure while avoiding controlling and chaotic styles. 
380 
 
The first week of the program will start with the first two-hour face-to-face session, 
381 
which will be more theoretically oriented (32,38). It will begin with a brief introduction by the 
382 
trainers, outlining the program structure and objectives. Following this, the session will start 
383 
with an interactive activity (15 min) called “Memories in PE.” In this activity, pre-service 
384 
teachers will autonomously write one positive memory of their PE teacher’s behavior on a green 
385 
sticky note (e.g., “They helped us with any problem we had”) and one negative memory on a 
386 
red sticky note (e.g., “They made us do exercises exactly as they instructed, or we were 
387 
punished”). Once completed, participants will place their sticky notes on the classroom 
388 
whiteboard for discussion at the end of the session. This activity serves as an experiential bridge 
389 
between their past experiences and the following theoretical content, helping to personalize and 
390 
contextualize the learning process. With this reflective foundation, the trainers will proceed 
391 
with the theoretical training based on SDT, focusing specifically on the role of BPN in 
392 
motivation (70 min). To foster engagement, trainers will actively involve participants through 
393 
guided questions (e.g., “What do you understand by BPN?”) and open discussions (e.g., “What 
394 
are the differences between autonomy and competence?”). At the end of the session, trainers 
395 

will read aloud the “Memories in PE” responses, initiating a group discussion on how these 
396 
experiences align with BPN and their impact on motivation in PE (30 min). The session will 
397 
conclude with a brief explanation of an individual assignment. Each pre-service teacher will 
398 
record a short (maximum four minutes) video explaining the SDT motivational sequence. 
399 
Additionally, a brief explanation of the next steps and the objectives for upcoming sessions will 
400 
be given to foster a positive disposition among the teachers (5 min). 
401 
The second session of the program, lasting four hours, will adopt a theoretical-practical 
402 
approach. In the first part of the session, a brief review of SDT from the previous session will 
403 
be conducted. Additionally, the (de)motivating teaching styles proposed by the circumplex 
404 
model will be introduced, explaining how these styles influence students’ BPN and their 
405 
motivation in PE (100 min). After this theoretical segment, participants will have a 20-minute 
406 
break before transitioning into the practical part. In the second part of the session, pre-service 
407 
teachers will be divided into small working groups of 4-5 participants. Each group will analyze 
408 
a series of video clips showcasing different (de)motivating teaching styles in authentic PE 
409 
lessons. Their primary task will be to identify and categorize the different motivational styles 
410 
observed in the videos. If there are any doubts, the corresponding videos will be presented to 
411 
the entire group, allowing the trainers and participants to collectively analyze the teaching styles 
412 
and reflect on their consequences for students’ BPN and motivation (60 min). Finally, pre-
413 
service teachers will regroup, and each group will select a PE content area to design a lesson 
414 
plan incorporating motivational strategies that support students’ BPN. Trainers will actively 
415 
supervise and provide formative feedback, addressing questions and guiding participants in 
416 
refining their lesson plans (55 min). To conclude the session, trainers will introduce the next 
417 
phase of the training program. They will explain that the upcoming sessions will be practical, 
418 
where pre-service teachers will implement the lesson plans they developed in this session. 
419 

These simulated lessons will be conducted with their peers acting as secondary school students, 
420 
providing an opportunity for hands-on practice and feedback. 
421 
The second week of the training program will commence with the third face-to-face 
422 
session, which will be fully practical and will span two hours. Through a random selection 
423 
process, two members from each group will be chosen to deliver the PE lesson they previously 
424 
designed. One will lead the first half of the session, and the other will take over for the second 
425 
half. Each teaching pair will have 45 minutes to implement their lesson, during which their 
426 
peers will assume the role of secondary school students, simulating a real classroom 
427 
environment. Additionally, a separate observer group consisting of 4-5 peers will use a 
428 
structured rubric to systematically assess and record the (de)motivating teaching styles and 
429 
instructional strategies employed by the pre-service teachers who were acting as instructors at 
430 
that time. After each lesson, the observer group will rotate, allowing a new set of participants 
431 
to assume the observer role, ensuring that all pre-service teachers experience both teaching and 
432 
observational perspectives. Following each session, the observers and trainers will engage in a 
433 
guided reflective discussion, providing constructive feedback on the teaching strategies used, 
434 
their alignment with SDT principles, and their effectiveness in supporting students’ BPN (10 
435 
min). Given the two-hour duration, two sessions can be implemented at this time. To further 
436 
enhance learning, each session will be video recorded. These recordings will be revisited in the 
437 
final session of the training program, allowing participants to engage in self-reflection, peer 
438 
review, and deeper analysis of their teaching styles and areas for improvement. 
439 
The fourth face-to-face session of the first phase of the training program will be a 
440 
practical session, following the same structure as the third session but with an extended duration 
441 
of four hours instead of two. Each group will have 45 minutes to implement their lesson, 
442 
followed by a 10-minute feedback period, during which trainers and the assigned observer 
443 
group will provide reflections on the session and the motivational strategies employed. The 
444 

session will begin with the first two teaching implementations, followed by a 15-minute break, 
445 
after which the remaining two sessions will be conducted. This structure ensures that in each 
446 
group, two members (i.e., pre-service teachers) will have the opportunity to teach, while all 
447 
participants will rotate through the roles of students and observers. As in the previous session, 
448 
the entire session will be recorded for later review and analysis in the final session of the training 
449 
program. 
450 
To conclude the first phase of the training program, a final two-hour face-to-face session 
451 
will be held during the third week. This session will involve presenting and analyzing selected 
452 
excerpts from the recorded videos of the previous two practical sessions, highlighting both 
453 
motivating and demotivating teaching strategies. The primary goal of this session is to stimulate 
454 
critical discussion, enabling pre-service teachers to analyze their own and their peers’ teaching 
455 
strategies. Participants will be encouraged to identify areas for improvement and propose 
456 
alternative strategies. Trainers will moderate the discussion, guiding participants toward 
457 
recognizing and replacing demotivating styles with strategies that better support students’ BPN. 
458 
The follow-up phase of the training program will take place in February and March as 
459 
part of the subject “[omitted for peer review],” which is conducted during the second semester 
460 
(i.e., January-June) of the MSc in PETE. During this subject, pre-service teachers are tasked 
461 
with designing a teaching unit that they will later implement during their practicum. 
462 
Accordingly, the second phase of the program comprises two in-person sessions. The first 
463 
session, scheduled for the third week of February and lasting two hours, will serve as a review 
464 
workshop. During this session, pre-service teachers will work in small groups to develop 
465 
motivational strategies and share their proposals with their peers. This collaborative process 
466 
will facilitate the co-creation of a dossier with motivational strategies, which will serve as a 
467 
reference to support them in designing the sessions of their teaching unit. 
468 

The second session, set for the second week of March, will consist of individual face-
469 
to-face mentoring meetings. In these sessions, trainers will review the teaching unit sessions 
470 
for each pre-service PE teacher. Each mentoring session will last approximately 30 minutes. 
471 
The main objective is to review the lesson plans and designed motivational strategies, provide 
472 
tailored guidance, and address any questions prior to one of the most critical phases of the MSc 
473 
in PETE, the practicum. 
474 
 
475 
<INSERT FIGURE 2 ABOUT HERE, PLEASE> 
476 
 
477 
Control group 
478 
Participants assigned to the control group will not receive the structured training 
479 
program designed for the experimental group. Instead, they will follow the standard curriculum 
480 
of the MSc in PETE, which includes general instruction on teaching skills and motivation in 
481 
PE. While this training also incorporates elements of SDT, it is delivered in a more theoretical 
482 
and lecture-based format, without the applied, interactive, and iterative components present in 
483 
the experimental group's intervention. Additionally, although the total number of instructional 
484 
hours dedicated to teaching skills is comparable between both groups, the control group’s 
485 
training does not specifically focus on the circumplex model or include practical components 
486 
such as microteaching, video analysis, or structured feedback. Their participation in the study 
487 
will be limited to completing the questionnaires at two specific time points: before starting the 
488 
MSc (i.e., pre-test) and upon its completion (i.e., post-test).  
489 
Analysis plan 
490 
Quantitative analyses 
491 
Firstly, to ensure statistical assumptions are met, Levene’s test will be used to assess the 
492 
homogeneity of variances, while the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test will verify the normality of the 
493 
data distribution (p > .05). Additionally, Cronbach’s alpha will be computed for each study 
494 

variable across the three measurement points to evaluate the internal consistency reliability. To 
495 
analyze the effects of the intervention a 3 × 2 (Time × Condition) repeated-measures 
496 
multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) will be conducted, including pre-service 
497 
teachers’ gender as a covariate. Consequently, this approach will allow for the assessment of 
498 
both the main effects of the intervention and potential interactions with gender, providing a 
499 
more precise understanding of its impact on different teaching profiles. In addition, multiple 
500 
paired t-tests with Bonferroni correction will be performed to assess differences between groups 
501 
(i.e., experimental vs. control) as well as within groups (i.e., pre-test vs. post-test). Effect sizes 
502 
will be interpreted following Cohen’s criteria, considering values of .01 as small, .06 as 
503 
moderate, and .14 as large. All statistical analyses will be carried out using IBM SPSS Statistics 
504 
v.29.0. Moreover, a longitudinal structural equation model will be employed to examine the 
505 
predictive relationships between the study variables, enabling the assessment of potential 
506 
changes across the three measurement points (i.e., pre-test, intermediate-test, and post-test). 
507 
Qualitative analyses 
508 
Qualitative data from the focus groups will be transcribed and analyzed using NVivo 
509 
11.0, following the thematic analysis framework outlined by Braun & Clarke (2019). Initially, 
510 
three researchers will independently review all transcripts to become thoroughly familiar with 
511 
the data. Next, they will identify and extract segments of text that pertain to pre-service 
512 
teachers’ perceptions of the training program’s effects and their experiences applying strategies 
513 
acquired during the practicum. Finally, after reviewing the coded data, themes will be selected 
514 
based on the most salient and relevant meanings emerging from the dataset. Given that most 
515 
focus group questions align with the study’s theoretical framework, a deductive thematic 
516 
analysis underpinned by SDT and the circumplex model will be conducted. Additionally, two 
517 
other researchers will oversee the process, providing insights and interpretations to ensure 
518 
consensus and enhance the reliability of the analysis. 
519 

 
520 
<INSERT TABLE 1 ABOUT HERE, PLEASE> 
521 
 
522 
Discussion 
523 
Interventions grounded on SDT have demonstrated effectiveness in enhancing the 
524 
motivating teaching styles of in-service PE teachers. However, replicating these interventions 
525 
remains challenging, as many protocols are not always reported in detail. Furthermore, research 
526 
on training programs targeting pre-service teachers is still scarce, despite the crucial role in 
527 
shaping future pedagogical practices. This challenge becomes even greater in university-based 
528 
initial teacher education programs, where transferring successful interventions to future 
529 
teachers is particularly complex, owing to the difficulties in applying theoretical knowledge in 
530 
practical settings. In response to this gap, the present study protocol outlines an SDT- and the 
531 
circumplex model-based intervention designed to improve autonomy-supportive and 
532 
structuring approaches (i.e., participative, attuning, guiding, and clarifying) while reducing 
533 
controlling and chaotic approaches (i.e., demanding, domineering, abandoning, and awaiting) 
534 
in pre-service PE teachers. 
535 
This study is expected to provide key contributions to the literature on PETE: (1) it 
536 
pioneers a motivational training program based on the circumplex model tailored for pre-
537 
service PE teachers, addressing an existing gap in initial teacher education by focusing on both 
538 
motivating and demotivating teaching approaches; (2) the training’s effectiveness will be 
539 
assessed using a multi-method evaluation strategy, integrating both a training-end questionnaire 
540 
and a concluding focus group, thus capturing participants’ immediate and reflective insights; 
541 
(3) a robust mixed-methods approach will be employed, integrating quantitative measures (i.e., 
542 
validated questionnaires) and qualitative insights (i.e., focus group discussions) to explore 
543 
changes in teaching styles, competence satisfaction, and motivation for teaching; (4) the study 
544 
will explore potential gender-based differences in response to the training, examining potential 
545 

variations in how male and female pre-service teachers experience and implement motivational 
546 
strategies. It aims to provide nuanced insights that could guide the development of more tailored 
547 
PETE interventions; (5) by incorporating multiple assessment points (i.e., pre-test, 
548 
intermediate-test, and post-test), the study will capture the progress of participants’ teaching 
549 
approaches, rather than relying solely on pre-post comparisons; (6) embedding the training 
550 
program within the established MSc in PETE curriculum ensures that the intervention is both 
551 
contextually relevant and scalable for broader application in teacher education; and (7) the 
552 
intervention will employ research-backed methodologies, including congruent teaching, video 
553 
analysis of real teaching scenarios, microteaching exercises, collaborative development of 
554 
teaching strategies, and personalized mentoring, facilitating meaningful integration of 
555 
motivating teaching styles into pre-service PE teachers (30–32,38). 
556 
The expected outcomes of this training program for pre-service PE teachers will be 
557 
analyzed in light of the study’s three hypotheses. Regarding the first hypothesis (H1), as 
558 
previously validated strategies from SDT-based training programs will be incorporated (i.e., 
559 
BPN-awareness, microteaching, video analysis, co-creation of teaching strategies, and expert 
560 
mentoring) (32,33,38) it is expected that pre-service PE teachers in the experimental group will 
561 
positively evaluate the training program, perceiving it as useful and applicable to their future 
562 
professional practice. Their feedback will be instrumental in refining the program to enhance 
563 
its acceptability, sustainability, and scalability, ensuring its feasibility for implementation in 
564 
other PETE programs. 
565 
Regarding the second hypothesis (H2) and given that motivational teaching styles are 
566 
teachable, malleable, and learnable (10,40), it is expected that pre-service PE teachers in the 
567 
experimental group will demonstrate a significant increase in the use of autonomy-supportive 
568 
(i.e., participative and attuning) and structuring (i.e., guiding and clarifying) teaching styles. 
569 
Simultaneously, a reduction in controlling (i.e., demanding and domineering) and chaotic (i.e., 
570 

abandoning and awaiting) teaching styles is anticipated. However, it is important to 
571 
acknowledge that, as pre-service teachers with no prior teaching experience, they may not 
572 
perceive or report changes in their teaching styles, as observed in the study by Perlman (2015). 
573 
This underscores the importance of incorporating observational and reflective methodologies, 
574 
such as video analysis and peer feedback, to depict behavioral changes beyond self-reported 
575 
perceptions accurately. 
576 
Finally, concerning the third hypothesis (H3), pre-service teachers are expected to 
577 
develop a stronger sense of competence in their instructional abilities by expanding their 
578 
repertoire of motivational teaching strategies. This, in turn, should lead to higher competence 
579 
satisfaction and lower competence frustration throughout their training. Following the 
580 
motivational sequence proposed by SDT, it is anticipated that enhanced perceived competence 
581 
will foster higher levels of autonomous motivation for teaching PE, while simultaneously 
582 
reducing controlled motivation and amotivation (24). These changes not only have implications 
583 
for pre-service teachers' immediate development but may also contribute to long-term 
584 
professional engagement and teaching quality once they enter the workforce. 
585 
Limitations 
586 
This study has several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the quasi-
587 
experimental design prevents random assignment, potentially introducing selection bias and 
588 
precluding causal inferences. However, implementing a fully randomized controlled trial in an 
589 
educational context presents both practical and ethical challenges. Given that the training 
590 
program is embedded within an official teacher education curriculum, it would be unfeasible 
591 
and arguably unethical to randomly assign pre-service teachers to receive or be denied 
592 
pedagogical training that could enhance their professional development. Restricting access to 
593 
an evidence-based intervention could disadvantage certain participants and create inequalities 
594 
in their preparation for future teaching. Moreover, logistical constraints, such as fixed course 
595 

enrollments and institutional policies, further limit the feasibility of random allocation. Second, 
596 
this study is conducted within a single Spanish university, which restricts the generalizability 
597 
of its findings. To improve the external validity, future studies should expand the sample across 
598 
multiple universities, both nationally and internationally, ensuring greater cross-context 
599 
applicability of the training program. Third, the study primarily focuses on short-term effects, 
600 
assessing pre-service teachers’ (de)motivating teaching styles during training and practicum. 
601 
However, it remains unclear whether these effects will persist once they transition to full-time 
602 
teaching positions. To address this issue, longitudinal follow-ups should be conducted to 
603 
examine the sustainability and long-term impact of the intervention. Fourth, the integration of 
604 
the training program into the MSc in PETE presents a logistical challenge, as the limited time 
605 
available within the program constrains the full implementation of all the training components 
606 
without disrupting other coursework. However, rather than modifying the program's structure, 
607 
a more impactful approach may be to advocate for its institutionalization within teacher 
608 
education curricula. If the training proves effective, collaborating with policymakers and 
609 
educational stakeholders could help establish it as a standardized component of PETE. This 
610 
would ensure that all pre-service PE teachers receive systematic training in motivational 
611 
teaching strategies without compromising other essential aspects of their teacher education. 
612 
Fifth, assessing actual changes in teaching behaviors remains complex, as the study relies on 
613 
self-reported data rather than direct observation of classroom practices. To strengthen data 
614 
triangulation, future research should integrate student-reported measures and independent 
615 
classroom observations by external evaluators. Finally, although the study includes an 
616 
observational phase during the practicum, its effectiveness may be compromised by external 
617 
constraints. These constraints include mentor teachers imposing specific teaching methods, 
618 
restricting instructional autonomy, or limiting pre-service teachers’ ability to apply the 
619 
motivational strategies learned during training. Future studies should explore alternative 
620 

practicum models where pre-service teachers have greater instructional freedom or collaborate 
621 
with practicum supervisors to align expectations regarding teaching autonomy. 
622 
Conclusions  
623 
This study presents a comprehensive protocol for a motivational training program 
624 
designed to enhance pre-service PE teachers’ motivating teaching styles. By integrating SDT 
625 
and the circumplex model within PETE, this program aims to promote the use of autonomy-
626 
supportive and structuring teaching styles, while reducing reliance on controlling and chaotic 
627 
styles. In doing so, it seeks to foster a more need-supportive learning environment, ultimately 
628 
benefiting both teachers’ pedagogical approaches and students’ motivational experiences in PE. 
629 
By employing a quasi-experimental, mixed-methods design, it seeks to provide empirical 
630 
evidence on how such training programs influence competence satisfaction, autonomous 
631 
motivation for teaching, and the application of motivational strategies in both training and 
632 
practicum settings. The structured nature of the intervention ensures that it is replicable and 
633 
scalable, making it adaptable to various PETE contexts. If the expected outcomes are 
634 
confirmed, the findings could significantly contribute to advancing evidence-based 
635 
motivational training programs, offering a scientifically grounded framework for strengthening 
636 
the preparation of future PE teachers. Furthermore, this research could serve as a foundation 
637 
for future studies aimed at refining and expanding motivational interventions in teacher 
638 
education, ultimately supporting the development of more effective, engaging, and student-
639 
centered PE instruction. 
 
640 

References 
641 
1.  
Rosli R, Goldsby D, Onwuegbuzie AJ, Capraro MM, Capraro RM, Gonzalez EGY. 
642 
Elementary preservice teachers’ knowledge, perceptions and attitudes towards fractions: 
643 
A mixed-analysis. Journal on Mathematics Education (2020) 11:59–76. doi: 
644 
10.22342/jme.11.1.9482.59-76 
645 
2.  
Richards KAR, Templin TJ. Chapter 3: Recruitment and retention in PETE: Foundations 
646 
in occupational socialization theory. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education (2018) 
647 
38:14–21. doi: 10.1123/jtpe.2018-0212 
648 
3.  
Ferry M. Physical education preservice teachers’ perceptions of the subject and 
649 
profession: development during 2005–2016. Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy (2018) 23:358–
650 
370. doi: 10.1080/17408989.2018.1441392 
651 
4.  
Reeve J, Vansteenkiste M, Assor A, Ahmad I, Cheon SH, Jang H, Kaplan H, Moss JD, 
652 
Olaussen BS, Wang CKJ. The beliefs that underlie autonomy-supportive and controlling 
653 
teaching: A multinational investigation. Motiv Emot (2014) 38:93–110. doi: 
654 
10.1007/s11031-013-9367-0 
655 
5.  
Escriva-Boulley G, Guillet-Descas E, Aelterman N, Vansteenkiste M, Van Doren N, 
656 
Lentillon-Kaestner V, Haerens L. Adopting the Situation in School Questionnaire to 
657 
examine Physical Education teachers’ motivating and demotivating styles using a 
658 
Circumplex Approach. Int J Environ Res Public Health (2021) 18:7342. doi: 
659 
10.3390/ijerph18147342 
660 
6.  
Aelterman N, Vansteenkiste M, Haerens L, Soenens B, Fontaine JRJ, Reeve J. Toward 
661 
an integrative and fine-grained insight in motivating and demotivating teaching styles: 
662 
The merits of a circumplex approach. J Educ Psychol (2019) 111:497–521. doi: 
663 
10.1037/edu0000293 
664 

7.  
Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, 
665 
development, and wellness. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press. (2017). 756, xii p. 
666 
8.  
White RL, Bennie A, Vasconcellos D, Cinelli R, Hilland T, Owen KB, Lonsdale C. Self-
667 
determination theory in physical education: A systematic review of qualitative studies. 
668 
Teach Teach Educ (2021) 99: doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2020.103247 
669 
9.  
Vasconcellos D, Parker PD, Hilland T, Cinelli R, Owen KB, Kapsal N, Lee J, Antczak 
670 
D, Ntoumanis N, Ryan RM, et al. Self-determination theory applied to physical 
671 
education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Educ Psychol (2020) 112:1444–
672 
1469. doi: 10.1037/edu0000420 
673 
10.  
Reeve J, Cheon SH. Autonomy-supportive teaching: Its malleability, benefits, and 
674 
potential to improve educational practice. Educ Psychol (2021) 56:54–77. doi: 
675 
10.1080/00461520.2020.1862657 
676 
11.  
Perlman D. Assisting preservice teachers toward more motivationally supportive 
677 
instruction. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education (2015) 34:119–130. doi: 
678 
10.1123/jtpe.2013-0208 
679 
12.  
Perlman D, Piletic C. The influence of an adapted physical education course on 
680 
preservice teacher instruction: Using a self-determination lens. Australian Journal of 
681 
Teacher Education (2012) 37:1–18. doi: 10.14221/ajte.2012v37n1.6 
682 
13.  
Großmann N, Fries S, Wilde M. Is the practice of autonomy support the missing element 
683 
in teacher training at university? A study on the effects of an intervention based on self-
684 
determination theory on biology preservice teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and intentions. 
685 
Front Psychol (2023) 14: doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1279771 
686 
14.  
Burgueño R, Abós Á, Sevil-Serrano J, Haerens L, De Cocker K, García-González L. A 
687 
circumplex approach to (de)motivating styles in physical education: Situations-In-
688 
School–Physical Education questionnaire in spanish students, pre-service, and in-service 
689 

teachers. 
Meas 
Phys 
Educ 
Exerc 
Sci 
(2024) 
28:86–108. 
doi: 
690 
10.1080/1091367X.2023.2248098 
691 
15.  
García-González L, Haerens L, Abós Á, Sevil-Serrano J, Burgueño R. Is high teacher 
692 
directiveness always negative? Associations with students’ motivational outcomes in 
693 
physical education. Teach Teach Educ (2023) 132: doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2023.104216 
694 
16.  
Haerens L, Vansteenkiste M, De Meester A, Delrue J, Tallir I, Vande Broek G, Goris W, 
695 
Aelterman N. Different combinations of perceived autonomy support and control: 
696 
identifying the most optimal motivating style. Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy (2018) 23:16–
697 
36. doi: 10.1080/17408989.2017.1346070 
698 
17.  
Burgueño R, García-González L, Abós, Sevil-Serrano J. Students’ motivational 
699 
experiences across profiles of perceived need-supportive and need-thwarting teaching 
700 
behaviors in physical education. Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy (2024) 1:82–96. doi: 
701 
10.1080/17408989.2022.2028757 
702 
18.  
Fierro-Suero S, Van Doren N, De Cocker K, Haerens L. Towards a refined insight into 
703 
physical education teachers’ autonomy-supportive, structuring, and controlling style to 
704 
the importance of student motivation: a person-centered approach. Phys Educ Sport 
705 
Pedagogy (2024)1–17. doi: 10.1080/17408989.2024.2432307 
706 
19.  
Leo FM, Pulido JJ, Sánchez-Oliva D, López-Gajardo MA, Mouratidis A. See the forest 
707 
by looking at the trees: Physical education teachers’ interpersonal style profiles and 
708 
students’ 
engagement. 
Eur 
Phy 
Educ 
Rev 
(2022) 
28:720–738. 
doi: 
709 
10.1177/1356336X221075501 
710 
20.  
García-Cazorla J, Abós Á, Haerens L, De Cocker K, Burgueño R, García-González L. 
711 
Does it matter whether physical education teachers combine structure with autonomy 
712 
support rather than control? Differences in motivation for teaching and work-related 
713 

outcomes. 
Phys 
Educ 
Sport 
Pedagogy 
(2025)1–18. 
doi: 
714 
10.1080/17408989.2025.2475175 
715 
21.  
Diloy-Peña S, Abós Á, Sevil-Serrano J, García-Cazorla J, García-González L. Students’ 
716 
perceptions of physical education teachers’ (de)motivating styles via the circumplex 
717 
approach: Differences by gender, grade level, experiences, intention to be active, and 
718 
learning. Eur Phy Educ Rev (2024) 30:563–583. doi: 10.1177/1356336X241229353 
719 
22.  
Ryan RM, Deci EL. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory 
720 
perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemp Educ Psychol 
721 
(2020) 61: doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860 
722 
23.  
Abós Á, Haerens L, Sevil J, Aelterman N, García-González L. Teachers’ motivation in 
723 
relation to their psychological functioning and interpersonal style: A variable- and 
724 
person-centered 
approach. 
Teach 
Teach 
Educ 
(2018) 
74:21–34. 
doi: 
725 
10.1016/j.tate.2018.04.010 
726 
24.  
Mayo-Rota C, García-González L, Diloy-Peña S, García-Cazorla J, Abós Á. ¿Qué 
727 
mueve a profesores y profesoras de Educación Física en formación a impartir clase con 
728 
distintos estilos (des)motivadores? Un estudio basado en el modelo circular [What drives 
729 
male and female preservice physical education teachers to teach with different 
730 
(de)motivating styles? A study based on the circumplex model]. Journal of Teaching in 
731 
Physical Education (2025) 44:182–195. doi: https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.2024-0091 
732 
25.  
Cheon SH, Reeve J, Vansteenkiste M. When teachers learn how to provide classroom 
733 
structure in an autonomy-supportive way: Benefits to teachers and their students. Teach 
734 
Teach Educ (2020) 90: doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2019.103004 
735 
26.  
Meng HY, Keng JWC. The effectiveness of an autonomy-supportive teaching structure 
736 
in physical education. RICYDE Revista internacional de ciencias del deporte (2016) 
737 
12:5–28. doi: 10.5232/ricyde2016.04301 
738 

27.  
Franco E, Coterón J. The effects of a physical education intervention to support the 
739 
satisfaction of basic psychological needs on the motivation and intentions to be 
740 
physically active. J Hum Kinet (2017) 59:5–15. doi: 10.1515/hukin-2017-0143 
741 
28.  
Sánchez-Oliva D, Pulido-González JJ, Leo FM, González-Ponce I, García-Calvo T. 
742 
Effects of an intervention with teachers in the physical education context: A Self-
743 
Determination 
Theory 
approach. 
PLoS 
One 
(2017) 
12:e0189986. 
doi: 
744 
10.1371/journal.pone.0189986 
745 
29.  
Conesa PJ, Duñabeitia JA, Onandia-Hinchado I, González-Cutre D. Satisfying students’ 
746 
psychological needs in the classroom: Benefits of an online intervention to help primary 
747 
school teachers during a pandemic academic year. Teach Teach Educ (2023) 133: doi: 
748 
10.1016/j.tate.2023.104281 
749 
30.  
García-Cazorla J, Sevil-Serrano J, García-González L, Abós Á. A motivational training 
750 
program for secondary physical education teachers based on the circumplex model: a 
751 
study protocol of a randomised controlled trial. Front Public Health (2024) 12: doi: 
752 
10.3389/fpubh.2024.1461630 
753 
31.  
Bouten A, Haerens L, Van Doren N, Compernolle S, De Cocker K. An online video 
754 
annotation tool for optimizing secondary teachers’ motivating style: Acceptability, 
755 
usability, 
and 
feasibility. 
Teach 
Teach 
Educ 
(2023) 
134:104307. 
doi: 
756 
10.1016/j.tate.2023.104307 
757 
32.  
Aelterman N, Vansteenkiste M, Van Keer H, De Meyer J, Van den Berghe L, Haerens 
758 
L. Development and evaluation of a training on need-supportive teaching in physical 
759 
education: Qualitative and quantitative findings. Teach Teach Educ (2013) 29:64–75. 
760 
doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2012.09.001 
761 

33.  
Reeve J, Cheon SH. Learning how to become an autonomy-supportive teacher begins 
762 
with perspective taking: A randomized control trial and model test. Teach Teach Educ 
763 
(2024) 148: doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2024.104702 
764 
34.  
McConnell MM, Monteiro S, Bryson GL. Sample size calculations for educational 
765 
interventions: principles and methods. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia (2019) 66:864–
766 
873. doi: 10.1007/s12630-019-01405-9 
767 
35.  
Dong N, Maynard R. PowerUp! : A tool for calculating minimum detectable effect sizes 
768 
and minimum required sample sizes for experimental and quasi-experimental design 
769 
studies. J Res Educ Eff (2013) 6:24–67. doi: 10.1080/19345747.2012.673143 
770 
36.  
Chen B, Vansteenkiste M, Beyers W, Boone L, Deci EL, Van der Kaap-Deeder J, Duriez 
771 
B, Lens W, Matos L, Mouratidis A, et al. Basic psychological need satisfaction, need 
772 
frustration, and need strength across four cultures. Motiv Emot (2015) 39:216–236. doi: 
773 
10.1007/s11031-014-9450-1 
774 
37.  
Abós Á, Sevil J, Martín-Albo J, Aibar A, García-González L. Validation evidence of the 
775 
motivation for teaching scale in secondary education. Spanish Journal of Psychology 
776 
(2018) 21:e9. doi: 10.1017/sjp.2018.11 
777 
38.  
Cheon SH, Reeve J. A classroom-based intervention to help teachers decrease students’ 
778 
amotivation. 
Contemp 
Educ 
Psychol 
(2015) 
40:99–111. 
doi: 
779 
10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.06.004 
780 
39.  
Braun V, Clarke V. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Res Sport Exerc 
781 
Health (2019) 11:589–597. doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806 
782 
40.  
Reeve J. Autonomy support as an interpersonal motivating style: Is it teachable? 
783 
Contemp Educ Psychol (1998) 23:312–330. 
784 
  
785 

Figure 1 
Characteristics of the training program and timeline for data collection 
 
 
 

Figure 2 
Summary of the training program sessions 

Table 1 
Key questions for the focus group discussion 
Areas 
Topic 
Questions 
Personal 
experiences 
Changes in (de)motivating 
teaching styles 
How do you think the training program influenced 
your style of teaching and interacting with students? 
Can you describe any specific changes in your 
teaching style? 
Changes in motivation for 
teaching 
Has the training program affected your motivation 
for teaching PE? If so, in what ways? 
Perceived competence 
development 
How has your sense of competence as a future PE 
teacher evolved throughout the program? Have there 
been specific moments that strengthened or 
challenged your confidence? 
Applicability 
Feasibility in real-world 
PE contexts 
To what extent do you think the strategies learned in 
the training are feasible for implementation in real-
world PE lessons? What factors facilitated or 
hindered their application? 
Perceived 
challenges 
Challenges during the 
practicum 
What difficulties did you encounter when trying to 
apply the training content during your practicum? 
How did you address these challenges? 
General feedback 
of the training 
program 
Long-term impact on 
teaching practices 
How do you think this training will influence your 
future teaching styles? Are there specific aspects of 
the program that you believe will have a lasting 
impact? 
Program strengths and 
areas for improvement 
What aspects of the training program did you find 
most 
valuable? 
What 
modifications 
or 
improvements would you suggest for future editions 
of the program?