Examining the mediating role of strategy use on students' motivation and persistence/effort in physical education.

School physical education programs have the potential to increase school children's physical activity levels and consequently serve as an important contributor in promoting public health (Sallis & McKenzie, 1991; Wallhead & Buckworth, 2004). Given that students' motivation to participate in physical education programs actually declines over the school years, and this decline is greater for the adolescents than young children, the middle school years are considered a critical period in the development of children's knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors (Malina, 1996; Rowland, 1999). Research has documented decreased student motivation for active participation and thus low levels of persistence and effort in physical education (Parish & Treasure, 2003; Trudeau & Shephard, 2005). As persistence and effort are key antecedents to motivation, research on the relations between children's motivation and persistence/effort has become imperative.

Among contemporary motivational theories, ability beliefs (i.e., self-efficacy) and adequate incentives (i.e., task values) for behaviors have been postulated to directly influence decisions individuals make about whether they would not participate in a task or continue to engage in a task following failure (Bandura, 1986; Pintrinch & Schunk, 1996). Self-efficacy and task values come from the expectancy-value model of achievement choice (Eccles et al., 1983) and Bandura's self-efficacy theory (1986, 1997). They are two major constructs that have emerged as being strongly predictive of individuals' achievement behaviors (Bong, 2001a, 200 lb, 2001c) and have been extensively applied in sport and physical education achievement contexts (Gao, 2008; Gao, 2009; Gao, Lodewyk, & Zhang, 2009).

Self-efficacy and Task Values

Self-efficacy refers to an individual's beliefs about his or her ability to learn or perform a specific task/activity at situational levels (Bandura, 1986, 1997). As a product of a complex process of self-persuasion, self-efficacy relies on cognitive processing of diverse sources of efficacy information including performance accomplishments, vicarious experiences, persuasion, and physiological states (Bandura, 1989). In general, individuals who feel efficacious are more likely to utilize effective strategies, demonstrate superior performance, and expend more effort on the tasks. To date, many studies have suggested that self-efficacy is positively associated with the type and effectiveness of strategy use, performance, effort, and persistence at tasks in sport and educational settings (Chase, 2001; Feltz & Magyar, 2006; Gao, 2008; Gao et al., 2009; Gao, Xiang, Lee, & Harrison, 2008; Vanzile-Tamsen, 1998; Zimmerman, 2000). For example, in physical education children with higher self-efficacy tend to have higher intention to participate in physical education in the future and be more persistence and exert more effort in class (Gao et al., 2009).

Task values are defined as incentives for engaging in different tasks, and are described as a multidimensional construct made up of four separate components: attainment value (importance), intrinsic value (interest), utility value (usefulness), and cost (Eccles et al., 1983). Importance refers to an individual's perceptions about the importance of doing well on a given task (e.g., achievement needs and competence needs). Interest concerns the enjoyment an individual gets from performing or engaging in the task or personal liking of the task. Usefulness refers to an individual's perceptions of how useful a task is to him or her. Cost concerns how the decision to engage in one activity (e.g., alter-school sports) limits access to other activities (e.g., playing video games), assessment of how much effort will be taken to accomplish the activity, and its emotional cost. Each of these components is proposed to have its own unique relationship with achievement behaviors. However, most empirical work has only focused on the first three components of the value construct and tends to neglect the notion of cost. In this study cost was not examined due to lack of appropriate measure, but was highly recommended to be studied in future research.

In sport and education contexts, task values might be a critical dimension relating to achievement-related cognitions, affect, and behaviors (Cox & Whaley, 2004; Gao, 2009; Gao et al., 2009; Xiang, McBride, Guan & Solmon, 2003; Xiang, McBride, & Bruene, 2004; Xiang, McBride, & Guan, 2004). Specifically, researchers have indicated that students' perceptions of importance, interest, and usefulness predicted their actual and anticipated task choice, strategy use, and engagement in both classroom and physical education (Cox & Whaley, 2004; Gao et al., 2009; Schunk, & Swartz, 1992a, 1992b; Xiang, McBride, & Bruene, 2004, 2006). Furthermore, it is posited that, compared to usefulness and importance, interest represents an more intrinsic aspect of the construct of task values and therefore is more influential in predicting individuals' achievement behaviors (Cox & Whaley, 2004; Eccles & Wigfield, 1995; Gao, 2009; Gao et al., 2009; Pintrinch, Ryan, & Patrick, 1998; Wigfield et al., 1997).

In the academic domain, a number of researchers have included self-efficacy and task values in examining students' motivational beliefs and achievement behaviors (Bong, 2001a, 2001b, 2001c; Pajares & Miller, 1994; Pajares, Miller, & Johnson, 1999; Pajares & Valiante, 1999). Students' self-efficacy and task values are posited to be operated together to predict achievement behaviors. For instance, Pajares and his colleagues have indicated that self-efficacy directly impacts performance, while task values only added small variance to academic performance when examined along with self-efficacy (Pajares & Miller, 1994; Pajares et al., 1999; Pajares & Valiante, 1999). This is in accordance with the previous research indicating that ability belief is a better predictor of performance than task values (Wigfield & Eccles, 1992). To our knowledge, these studies only examined the overall task values rather than the separate components of task values. Furthermore, no known studies have combined self-efficacy and task values to predict achievement outcomes in sport and physical activity. Additionally, the investigation of students' self-efficacy, task values, strategy use, and persistence/effort in sport and physical education has been scarce. Therefore, research focusing on this topic is highly warranted.

Persistence/Effort and Strategy Use

In this study, students' self-reported persistence/effort was utilized as the index of their achievement behaviors. Researchers in both classroom and physical education (e.g., Elliot, McGregor, & Gable, 1999; Xiang & Lee, 2002) consider persistence and effort to be important indicators of achievement outcomes. Persistence is defined as a continued investment in learning when obstacles are encountered whereas effort refers to the overall amount of energy expended in the process of learning (Zimmerman & Risemberg, 1997). As indicated by Roberts (2001), persistence and effort are not only assumed to reflect motivation and are important indicators of achievement behaviors, but also are among the criteria researchers use to assess motivation in sport and physical education.

Many previous studies have indicated that strategy use is very important to achievement behaviors (e.g., Shuell, 1983). Researchers who have examined the relationship between learning and strategy use have come to the conclusion that motivational beliefs are very important to strategy use (Ames & Archer, 1988; Pintrich & De Groot, 1990; Tuckman, 1990). Therefore, strategy use has been posited to be a good motivational index for achievement motivation (Schunk, 1995). Specifically, when investigating motivational influences on strategy use in academic domains, researchers have demonstrated that more positively motivated individuals (with high ability beliefs and task values) were more likely to use effective learning strategies (Braten & Olaussen, 1998, 2005; McWhaw & Abrami, 2002; Pintrich & De Groot, 1990; Schunk & Swartz, 1992a, 1992b; Vanzile-Tamsen, 1998). Furthermore, students' effective strategy use was highly related to their achievement behaviors and teachers' ratings of their self-regulation in classroom settings (Ruban & Reis, 2006, Ryska & Vestal, 2004). Although work directly linking strategy use to persistence/effort is limited, Bandura 0956) has argued that, in the face of failure or aversive stimuli, an individual might be demotivated, he or she would minimize efforts to use effective strategies, and consequently the degree of persistence/ effort would decrease. In other words, students' strategy use can be a significant predictor for their persistence/effort.

One pathway by which individuals' motivational beliefs (i.e., self-efficacy, control beliefs, interest) affect achievement behaviors is through strategy use (Greene & Miller, 1996; Lachman & Andreoletti, 2006; McWhaw & Abrami, 2002). That is, individuals' motivational beliefs impacted their effective strategy use, which, in turn, influenced their achievement behaviors such as task performance, persistence, and effort. For example, Hertzog and colleagues (2003) has shown that individuals' effective strategy use mediated the effects of control beliefs on a paired associate recall task. Another recent study also supported this mediating effect of strategy use on control beliefs and memory performance among the middle-aged adults (Lachman & Andreoletti, 2006). However, examining the mediating role of strategy use in physical education has been less studied and accordingly this study attempted to provide new empirical evidence in this area of inquiry.

The purpose of this study was to examine the mediating effect of strategy use on the motivational beliefs (self-efficacy, perceptions of importance, interest, and usefulness) and persistence/effort in a middle school physical education setting. Based on the literature review and empirical studies, the hypothesized model was developed (See Figure 1). The hypothesized model predicted that: (a) students' self-efficacy, perceptions of importance, interest, and usefulness would significantly predict their strategy use; (b) students' strategy use would be the strongest predictor of their persistence/effort followed by self-efficacy and perceptions of interest; and (c) students' strategy use would mediate the relationships between the motivational beliefs and persistence/effort.

Methods

The Participants and Setting

The participants were 100 sixth graders and 94 seventh graders (105 boys, 89 girls; Mage = 12.88, SD = [+ or -] .74) enrolled in one suburban public school in a Southeastern state of the United States. The majority of the participants was Caucasian (86.6%) and came from middle- and upper-socioeconomic background. Permission to conduct this study was obtained from the University Institutional Review Board, the school district, the school principal, and the physical education teachers. Additionally, consent forms were completed by all participants and their parent/guardian prior to the start of the study.

Participants were enrolled in one of six physical education classes. They were taught a 90-minute physical education class by three physical education teachers on alternate days. All the teachers earned master degrees of physical education teacher education and had at least 10 years teaching experiences. They shared the responsibility for the teaching assignments in the three classes of each grade. More specifically, the teachers taught each class of each grade by rotation and thus the teacher effect on the study variables was minimized. General instructional protocol included attendance taken by the teacher as students arrived in the gym followed by student participation in warm-up activities and games. A typical class included introducing skills to be learned, organizing students for practice during the middle of the class, and providing closure to the lesson at the end of the class. The curriculum activities consisted of a variety of movement and sport skills, including soccer, capture the flag, jogging or walking and other physical fitness activities. During the data collection period, all the students took the fitness activity class in the gym.

Measures

Demographic Variables. Self-report information on sex, race, grade, age, height, and weight were obtained from the questionnaire to characterize the sample.

Self-efficacy. A six-item scale was borrowed from a recent study (Gao et al., 2009). This measure has demonstrated acceptable Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficients in the previous study (ct = .78). The participants responded to the items using a 5-point Likert-type scale anchored from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), with the stem "With regard to this week's fitness activity class, I have confidence in ..." The answers were: (a) my ability to do well in fitness activities; (b) my ability to learn skills well in fitness activities; (c) my performance in fitness activities; (d) my knowledge needed to do well in fitness activities; (e) my success in fitness activities if I exert enough effort; and (f) my ability to handle the anxiety related to fitness activities. The mean of these six items was computed to provide an overall indication of the magnitude of a student's self-efficacy beliefs for fitness activitiy class.

Task Values. In this study, task values consisted of importance, interest, and usefulness. Two questions were used to assess students' perceptions of importance using a 5-point Likert-type scale. The students were asked: (a) For me, being good at the activities in fitness activity class is...... (1 = not very important, 5 = very important); and (b) Compared to your school subjects, how important is it to you to be good at activities in fitness activity class? (1 = not very important, 5 = very important). Two questions also were used to assess students' perceptions of interest, again using a 5-point scale: (a) In general, I find learning new activities in fitness activity class is ... (1 = "way" boring, 5 = "way" fun); and (b) How much do you like activities in fitness activity class? (1 = don't like it at all, 5 = like it very much). Two questions were again posed to assess students' perceptions of usefulness. The questions were: (a) Some things that you learn in school help you do things better outside of class. We call this being useful. For example, learning about plants might help you grow a garden. In general, how useful is what you learn in fitness activity class? (1 = not useful at all, 5 = very useful); and (b) Compared to your other school subjects, how useful is what you learn in fitness activity class? (1 = not useful at all, 5 = very useful). The average scores of each of these two-item scales were used to reflect students' perceived importance, interest, and usefulness toward physical education. Previous use of this measure among elementary and secondary school students (Xiang et al., 2003; Xiang, McBride, & Bruene, 2004) has demonstrated acceptable validity and internal consistency ([alpha] = .74-.83) in physical education.

Strategy Use. A 5-item measure focusing on self-regulatory processes associated with strategy use was used to assess students' self-reported use of strategies (Gano-Overway & Ewing, 2004). The items were responded to on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree) and previous research has supported the validity and reliability of the measure (Gano-Overway & Ewing, 2004). The stem was"In this fitness activity class, when I am practicing ..." The answers were: (a) I often practice on my own; (b) I take time to decide what I am supposed to focus on rather than just practicing; (c) I try to set goals for myself; (d) I try to use my teacher's feedback to make my skills better; and (e) I try to relate my skills to how I might perform in a competition. The average score of these items was used as the values of students' strategy use in physical education.

Persistence/Effort. This 8-item measure came from a recent study (Guan, Xiang, McBride, & Bruene, 2006) included four items each for assessing persistence and effort. Although persistence and effort represent two different constructs theoretically, previous studies revealed that the two could be combined into one single reliable factor (Guan et al., 2006; Xiang & Lee, 2002). In this study, students rated each item on a 7-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The stem for these items was "In this fitness activity class ..." The items were: (a) When I have a trouble performing some skills, I go back and practice; and (b) Regardless of whether or not I like the activities, I work my hardest to do them; (c) When something that I am practicing is difficult, I spend extra time and effort trying to do it right; (d) I try to learn and to do well, even if the activity is boring; (e) I put a lot effort into preparing for skill tests; (f) I work very hard to prepare for our skill tests; (g) I work hard to do well even if I do not like what we are doing; and (h) I always pay attention to my teacher. The average score of these eight-item scales was used as the values of students' persistence/effort in physical education.

Procedures

This study used a prospective design. Students' self-reported self-efficacy, perceptions of importance, interest, usefulness, and strategy use were measured at baseline (Time 1). The surveys were administered and collected during regularly scheduled physical education classes. The average time required to complete the survey was about ten minutes. The physical education teachers and the primary investigator (PI) managed students seating in the gym and the PI administered the survey by explaining how to respond to the questions. Students were encouraged to answer truthfully and were assured that their responses were anonymous and would not affect their physical education grades. The PI clearly stated that there were no right or wrong answers, and the teachers would not have access to their responses. In addition, the PI monitored and assisted students by answering any questions they had. Students' perceived persistence/effort in physical education class was measured during a 1-week follow-up (Time 2). Specifically, students completed the self-reported persistence/effort survey at the end of each physical education class for three classes.

Data Analyses

First, as a preliminary analysis, a one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted to examine if there was a teacher effect on the study variables. The results of the preliminary analysis would provide a basis as to whether the data from different classes should be combined for subsequent analyses. The criterion of .70 established by Nunnally (1978) was used to determine if the measures were internally consistent in this study. Third, descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations were calculated to describe the sample and evaluate simple correlations. Finally, path analyses were employed to test the mediational effect of strategy use in the hypothesized model.

According to Baron and Kenny (1986), a variable functions as a mediator when the following several criteria are met: (a) the independent variables (self-efficacy, perceptions of importance, interest, and usefulness) significantly affects the presumed mediator (strategy use); (b) the mediator significantly predicts the dependent variable (persistence/effort); (c) the independent variables significantly predicts the dependent variable; and (d) when the above two effects are controlled, a previously significant relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variable is no longer significant, with the strongest demonstration of mediation occurring when path between them is zero. Based on the last criterion, the indirect effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable via the mediator is calculated to confirm the predictive strength of the mediator.

Specifically, path analysis of the hypothesized model (over identified models) was conducted using Amos 5.0 (Arbuckle, 2003) to test if the model fit the data, and to examine if the first two mediator criteria were met. With a good fit, a second path analysis was performed to identify the direct effects of the independent variables on the dependent variable (persistence/ effort). Finally, the third path analysis was conducted using the just identified models (equal numbers of parameters and observations) to test the last mediator criterion. Path analysis is an advanced technique that to simultaneously tests for mediator and outcome effects. It belongs to the structural equation modeling family of analyses and reflects the structural model of the hybrid model (i.e., path and measurement models). In this study, a single observed measure (e.g., average score) was used for each variable. Considering the research conceptualization and purpose, the size of the research sample, and the way data were treated, path analysis reflects an appropriate statistical technique to analyze the data in this study (Kline, 2005).

Maximum likelihood method was employed to derive parameter estimates in the models. The model fit was assessed using multiple indices. The overall fit of the model to the data was examined via the chi-square test ([chi square]). A nonsignificant [chi square] indicates the model to be an acceptable fit to the data. Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) represents closeness of fit, and values approximating .06 and zero demonstrate close and exact fit of the model (Hu & Bentler, 1999). The comparative fit index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) and normed fit index (NFI) test the proportionate improvement in fit by comparing the target model with the baseline model (independence model). Minimally acceptable fit was based on CFI, TLI, and NFI values of.90; values approximating .95 indicated good fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999).

Results

Preliminary MANOVA

MANOVA was conducted to examine teacher effect on students' responses to the survey. Prior to the MANOVA analysis, the assumption of multivariate normality and homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices was examined. The values of skewness ranged from -.15 to -1.26, indicating that the variables (self-efficacy, task values, strategy use, and persistence/ effort) were approximately normally distributed. In addition, the Box M test revealed no violation of the assumption of homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices (F = .76, p > .05). Results of the MANOVA indicated that students from different classes were not significantly different from one another in relation to all the variables, Wilks' [LAMBDA] = .95, [F.sub.10,374] = .91, p = .53, [[eta].sup.2] =.02. Therefore, the data from those students were combined for further analyses.

Scale Reliability, Correlation, and Descriptive Analyses

Reliabilities of the self-reported measures are listed in Table 1. As shown, Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the measures exceeded the minimum recommended value of .70, indicating the measures had acceptable internal consistency in this population of middle school students.

Table 1 shows that the descriptive statistics for the whole sample and the bivariate correlations among the variables. In general, students displayed relatively high self-efficacy and task values in physical education, as all the mean scores of these variables were above the midpoint of the scale (i.e., 3 for self-efficacy, perceptions of importance, interest, and usefulness). Also, students reported high levels of perceived strategy use and persistence/effort. In line with the previous studies, correlation analyses revealed that all the self-reported measures were significantly and positively related to one another (r = .28-.56, p < .01 for all).

Mediating Role of Strategy Use on Motivational Variables and Persistence/Effort

The hypothesized model was tested with the paths depicted in Figure 1. This model demonstrated a good fit to the data, [chi square] (1, N= 194) = 1.413,p = .235, CFI = .999, TLI = .981, NFI = .996, RMSEA = .046. Path significance was based on the critical ratio (CR), which is the parameter estimate divided by an estimate of the standard error. When the CR was larger than 1.96 for a regression weight, that path was significant at the .05 level. That is, its estimated path parameter is significant. Six path coefficients were statistically significant at p < .05, however the path from importance to strategy use was not significant. For the second path analysis to determine the direct effect of the independent variables on the dependent variable, only self-efficacy and interest had a significantly direct effect on persistence/effort ([beta] = .29, [beta] = .34, respectively). In other words, importance and usefulness failed to predict persistence/effort in this study. Therefore, importance was trimmed from the hypothesized model. The trimmed model was tested (Figure 2). The revised model also fit the data well, [chi square] (1, N = 194) = 2.061, p = .151, CFI = .996, TLI = .962, NFI = .993, RMSEA = .058. Self-efficacy, interest, and usefulness had direct effect on strategy use ([beta] = .29, [beta] =. 13, [beta] = .21, respectively), suggesting that most of the independent variables significantly predicted the mediator. Interest had the highest significant direct effect on persistence/effort ([alpha] = .34) followed by self-efficacy ([beta] = .25) and strategy use ([beta] = .23). The second criterion was satisfied, and the third criterion was partially supported. The overall variance in strategy use and persistence/effort explained by the model was 25.5% and 43.5%, respectively.

When the unique contribution of strategy use to persistence/effort was controlled (just identified model), self-efficacy and interest still had a significant direct effect on persistence/ effort ([beta] = .23, [beta] = .33, respectively). In addition, in the trimmed model, the indirect effects of self-efficacy and interest on persistence/effort via strategy use were very small ([beta] = .06, [beta] = .03, respectively, ns), indicating that the last criterion was not satisfied. Based on the results, the mediating role of strategy use on the study variables was not supported in this study.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Discussion

This study was an initial attempt to use prospective data to test an integrated model among middle school students by exploring the mediating role of strategy use on the motivational beliefs and persistence/effort. Prior to the main analyses, support was provided for internal consistency of the measures used in this study. In addition, the study variables were significantly and positively associated with one another.

In the present study, students' self-efficacy was the most significant predictor of strategy use. Middle school students with higher self-efficacy beliefs were more likely to use effective strategies than those with lower levels of self-efficacy. Consistent with many previous studies, self-efficacy has been one of the strongest predictors of using effective strategies in the academic domains (Pintrich & De Groot, 1990; Schunk & Swartz, 1992a, 1992b). Lee (1997) also suggested that students with high ability beliefs would employ learning strategies to enhance the acquisition and retention of information or skills in physical education class. Meanwhile, usefulness and interest significantly predicted strategy use. In other words, students who perceived physical education as useful and were interested in it were more likely to use effective strategies. However, students' perceived importance failed to predict strategy use. The findings partially support the first hypothesis.

As expected, self-efficacy exhibited significant direct effect on persistence/effort. The finding is in line with the extant studies indicating that, in contexts where one has little chance for withdrawal such as physical education programs, ability beliefs are posited to predict persistence and effort (Cox & Whaley, 2004; Dishman et al., 2004; Xiang et al., 2003; Xiang, McBride, & Guan, 2004). Interest also exerted a significant direct effect on persistence/effort. This result is in accordance with the recent findings with high school students (Cox & Whaley, 2004). Although Cox and Whaley used teacher-reported persistence/effort, interest was the only significant predictor of persistence/effort from three components of task values in their study. Additionally, in accordance with the findings in the academic domains, strategy use exerted a direct effect on persistence/effort. Specifically, students who tend to use effective leaning strategies were more likely to report high levels of persistence/effort in class.

Surprisingly, students' perceived importance failed to predict neither strategy use nor persistence/effort. Previous studies have suggested that importance was a significant contributor of students' intention for future participation in physical education or running (Xiang et al., 2003; Xiang, McBride, & Bruene, 2004, 2006; Xiang, McBride, & Guan, 2004). It is possible that the achievement indices used in this study were not sensitive to the measures of importance. Another plausible explanation might be that, compared to the academic subjects, physical education is marginalized on a global scale in the U.S. (Stroot & Whipple, 2003). Thus, students' perceptions concerning the importance of physical education would not differ significantly among the middle school students. Collectively, the research findings again partially support the second hypothesis.

In the present study, strategy use failed to serve as a significant mediator between the motivational beliefs and persistence/effort. This finding contradicts the third research hypothesis. We would speculate that the middle school students with higher self-efficacy and perceptions of interest toward physical education would be more likely to report effective strategy use, be persistence, and exert effort in class. However, students' self-efficacy and perceptions of interest displayed similar or more predictive utility on persistence/effort than strategy use. For example, the path coefficient between perceptions of interest and persistence/effort was .34, while the path coefficient between perceptions of interest and strategy use was only. 13. Consequently, it is possible that the relatively low relationship (i.e.,. 13) caused the failure of strategy use as a mediator. Furthermore, it is unknown whether this finding is only specific to the study sample. This is an area that deserves further attention with more diverse students. The overall variances in strategy use and persistence/effort explained by task values and self-efficacy were higher than the variance explained by the expectancy-value model variables (e.g., 7%-23%; Xiang et al., 2003). Apparently, integrating self-efficacy into the expectancy-value model facilitates a more complete understanding of student motivation and achievement outcomes. This study echoes Xiang and colleagues' advocacy of using multiple theoretical perspectives to study students' motivation and achievement outcomes, as motivation represents "a complex process in which multiple factors interact to impact students' achievement-related cognition, affect, and behavior" (Xiang, McBride, & Bruene, 2006, p.204).

Taken together, the findings of this study support a growing body of evidence that self-efficacy and task values significantly predict students' achievement outcomes (Cox & Whaley, 2004; Rovniak, Anderson, Winett, & Stephen, 2002; Xiang, McBride, & Bruene, 2004, 2006), and confirm the proposal of the needs to integrate theoretical frameworks in the field (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002). In fact, self-efficacy and task values have already been utilized as motivational beliefs in the academic domains (Boris, 2001a, 2001b; Britner & Pajares, 2001; Pajares & Valiante, 1999). Although importance failed to emerge as a significant predictor of strategy use in this study, it must be remembered that this construct might predict other achievement indices such as task choice or with other samples.

Implications and Limitations of This Study

The findings in this study have significant implications for educational practice in physical education. First, as the results have shown, students are more likely to adopt effective strategy use and be persistence when they believe they can accomplish a specific task or activity. Physical educators can and should help students maintain relatively accurate but high self-efficacy, and assist them in the avoidance of perception of incompetence as well. To achieve this, physical educators should adapt learning to individual levels of ability, foster a sense of success and positive ability perceptions by helping students successfully complete the task, provide accurate and timely feedback during practice, and use role models to provide vicarious experiences (Gao, 2008; Gao, Lee, & Harrison, 2008).

Second, students' perceived interest in physical education directly predicted their strategy use and persistence/effort. Considering that one of the important goals is to foster students' interest in physical education, it is crucial for physical educators to present learning activities in interesting, novel, and meaningful ways, and create a safe and caring learning environment to enhance students' situational interest in physical education. This will encourage students from a large variety of backgrounds and skill levels to be actively engaged in the physical education classes. Also, students' perceived usefulness of physical education showed significant prediction on strategy use. This finding implies that physical educators might emphasize the usefulness or utility of physical education throughout the course of middle school. To help students become more personally invested in the games or sport activities in physical education, teachers should make the activities meaningful for them, and positively reinforce task completion. Finally, given that students' self-reported strategy use predicted their persistence/effort, physical educators can help students select appropriate strategy use during the learning process, attempt to include more strategy instruction within a particular learning activity, incorporate timely teacher feedbacks into skill practice, help students organize tasks and focus on key points, have students work with one another on skill development, and emphasize hard work with specific practice strategy (Gano-Overway & Ewing, 2004).

Strengths of this study include its exploratory nature of integrating constructs from two motivation theories and the use of path analysis. However, the limitations this study should be noted. First, the participants came from one public school and most of the participants were Caucasian and were from middle- and upper-class. Accordingly, the hypothesized model in this study should be tested with a larger and more diverse sample in future research. Additionally, although the measures of strategy use and persistence/effort were validated as indices of achievement behaviors prior to the main analyses, it would have been desirable to have a more objective measure of these outcome variables in future study.

Overall, the results of this study help to test the hypothesized model integrating self-efficacy and three task values among middle school students in physical education. The revised model suggested that (a) self-efficacy, usefulness, and interest significantly predict strategy use; (b) interest and self-efficacy significantly influence persistence/effort; and (c) strategy use significantly predict persistence/effort but fail to mediate the relations between the motivational beliefs and persistence/effort. Six of the hypothesized paths were statistically significant, and the model accounted for 25.5% of the variance in strategy use, and 43.5% of the variance in persistence/effort. The findings shed important lights on integrating self-efficacy and task values and broadening the foundation regarding empirical knowledge base for these theoretical frameworks. Continued research is needed to test this model with larger samples of school children who are more diversified in terms of race and socioeconomic status, to consider additional variable that might influence achievement motivation, to develop integrated theoretical models to gain a better understanding of children's motivation and achievement behaviors, and to apply appropriate interventions to increase the number and engagement levels of school children in quality programs on a daily basis.

References

Ames, C., & Archer, A. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 208-223.

Arbuckle, J. L. (2003). Amos 5.0 update to the Amos user's guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Annals of child development (Vol. 6, pp. 1-60). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.

Bong, M. (2001 a). Between and within-domain relations of academic motivation among middle and high school students: Self-efficacy, task-value, and achievement goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 23-34.

Bong, M. (2001b). Academic motivation in self-efficacy, task value, achievement goals orientation, and attributional beliefs. The Journal of Educational Research, 97, 287-297.

Bong, M. (2001c). Role of self-efficacy and task-value in predicting college students' course performance and future enrollment intentions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26 (4), 553-570.

Braten, I., & Olaussen, B.S. (1998). The relationship between motivational beliefs and learning strategy use among Norwegian college students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23 (2), 182-194.

Britner, S.L., & Pajares, F. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, race, and gender in middle school science. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7, 271-285.

Chase, M. A. (2001). Children's self-efficacy, motivational intentions, and attributions in physical education and sport. Research Quarterly for Sport and Exercise, 72, 47-54.

Cox, A.E., & Whaley, D.E. (2004). The influence of task value, expectancies for success, and identity on athletes' achievement behaviors. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 16, 103-117.

Dishman, R.K., Motel, R.W., Saunders, R.P., Dowda, M., Felton, G., Ward, D.S. & Pate, R.R. (2004). Factorial invariance and latent mean structure of questionnaires measuring social-cognitive determinants of physical activity among Black and White adolescent girls. Preventive Medicine, 34, 100-108.

Eccles, J.S., Adler, T.E, Futterman, R., Goff, S.B., Kaczala, C.M., Meece, J., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In J.T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 75-146). San Francisco: W.H. freeman.

Eccles J.S., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: The structure of adolescents' achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 215-225.

Eccles, J.S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.

Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 549-563.

Feltz, D., & Magyar, T.M. (2006). Self-efficacy and adolescents in sport and physical activity. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Adolescence and education, Vol. 4: Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 161-179). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Gano-Overway, L.A., & Ewing, M.E. (2004). A longitudinal perspective of the relationship between perceived motivational climate, goal orientations, and strategy use. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 75, 315-325.

Gao, Z. (2008). College students' motivation in weight training: A combined perspective. Journal of Sport Behavior, 31 (1), 22-43.

Gao, Z. (2009). Students' motivation, engagement, satisfaction, and cardiorespiratory fitness in physical education. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 21, 5102-5115.

Gao, Z., Lee, A.M., & Harrison, L. Jr. (2008). Understanding students' motivation in sport and physical education: From the expectancy-value model and self-efficacy theory perspectives. Quest, 60, 236-254.

Gao, Z., Lodewyk, K., & Zhang, T. (2009). The role of ability beliefs and incentives in middle school students' intentions, cardiovascular fitness, and effort. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 28, 3-20.

Gao, Z., Xiang, P., Lee, A.M., & Harrison, L. Jr. (2008). Self-efficacy and outcome expectancy in beginning weight training class: Their relations to behavioral intentions and actual behavior. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 79, 92-100.

Greene, B.A., & Miller, R.B. (1996). Influences on achievement: Goals, perceived ability, and cognitive engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21 (2), 181-192.

Guan, J., Xiang, P., McBride, R., & Bruene, A. (2006). Achievement goals, social goals, and students' reported persistence and effort in high school physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 25, 58-74.

Hertzog, C., Dunlosky, J., & Robinson, A.E. (2003, November). Control beliefs influence strategic behavior in associative learning. Paper presented at the meeting of the Gerontological Society of America, San Diego, CA.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.

Kline, R.B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd Ed.) New York: Guilford.

Lachman, M.E., & Andreoletti, C. (2006). Strategy use mediates the relationship between control beliefs and memory performance for middle-aged and older adults. The Journal of Gerontology, 61B(2), 88-94.

Lee, A.M. (1997). Contributions of research on student thinking in physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 16, 262-277.

Malina, R.M. (1996). Tracking of physical activity and fitness across the lifespan. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 67, 48-57.

McWhaw, K., & Abrami, P.C. (2002). Student goal orientation and interest: Effects on students' use of self-regulated learning strategies. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26 (3), 311-329.

Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Pajares, F., & Miller, M.D. (1994). The role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem-solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 193-203.

Pajares, F., Miller, M.D., & Johnson, M.J. (1999). Gender differences in writing self-beliefs of elementary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 50-61.

Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (1999). Grade level and gender differences in the writing self-beliefs of middle school students. Contemporary Education Psychology, 24, 390-405.

Parish, L.E. & Treasure, D.C. (2003). Physical activity and situational motivation in physical education: Influence of the motivational climate and perceived ability. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74, 173-182.

Pintrich, P.R., & De Groot, E.V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.

Pintrich, P., Ryan, A.M., & Patrick, H. (1998). The differential impact of task value and mastery orientation on males' and females' self-regulation learning. In L. Hoffmann, A. Krapp, K.A. Renninger, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Interest and learning (pp. 337-354). Kiel, Germany: Institute for Science Education.

Pintrich, P., & Schunk, D.H. (1996). Motivation in Education: Theory, Research & Application. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Roberts, G.C. (2001). Understanding the dynamics of motivation in physical activity: The influence of achievement goals on motivational process. In G.C. Roberts (Ed.), Advances in motivation in sport and exercise (pp. 1-50). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Rowland, T.W. (1999). Adolescence: A 'risk factor' for physical inactivity. In C. Corbin & R.P. Pangrazi (Eds.), The President's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports Research Digest, 3(6), 1-8.

Rovniak, L.S., Anderson, E.S., Winett, R.A., & Stephen, R.S. (2002). Social cognitive determinants of physical activity in young adults: A prospective structural equation analysis. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 24, 149-156.

Ruban, L., & Reis, S.M. (2006). Patterns of self-Regulatory strategy use among low-achieving and high-achieving university students. Roeper Review, 28(3), 148-156.

Ryska, A.T., & Vestal, S. (2004). Effects of sport motivation on academic strategies and attitudes among high school student athletes. North American Journal of Psychology, 6(1), 101-120.

Sallis, J. F., & Mckenzie, T.L. (1991). Physical education's role in public health. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 62, 124-137.

Schunk, D.H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J.E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application (pp. 281-301). New York: Plenum.

Schunk, D.H., & Swartz, C.W. (1992a). Goals and progress feedback: Effects on self-efficacy and writing achievement. Unpublished manuscript, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Schunk, D.H., & Swartz, C.W. (1992b). Writing strategy instruction with gifted students: Effects of goals and feedback on self-efficacy and skills. Unpublished manuscript, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

Shuell, T.J. (1983). The role of the student in learning from instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13, 276-295.

Stroot, S.A., & Whipple, C.E. (2003). Organizational socialization: Factors affecting beginning teachers. In S.J. Silverman, & C.D. Ennis (Eds.), Student learning in physical education: Applying research to enhance instruction (pp. 295-310). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Trudeau, F., & Shephard, R. J. (2005). Contribution of school programmes to physical activity levels and attitudes in children and adults. Sports Medicine, 35, 89-105.

Tuckman, B.W. (1990). Group versus goal-setting effects on the self-regulated performance of students differing in self-efficacy. Journal of Experimental Education, 58(4), 291-298.

Vanzile-Tamsen, C.M. (1998). Factors underlying cognitive strategy use. Paper presented at National Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Tampa, FL.

Wallhead, T.L., & Buckworth, J. (2004). The role of physical education in the promotion of youth physical activity. Quest, 56, 285-301.

Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J.S. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis. Developmental Review, 12, 265-310.

Wigfield, A., Eccles, J.S., Yoon, K.S., Harold, R., Arbreton, A., Freedman-Doan, C., & Blumenfeld, P.C. (1997). Changes in children's ability beliefs and subjective task values across the elementary school years: A three-year study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 451-469.

Xiang, P., & Lee, A.M. (2002). Achievement goals, perceived motivational climate, and students' self-reported mastery behaviors. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 73, 58-65.

Xiang, P., McBride, R., & Bruene, A. (2004). Fourth graders' motivation in an elementary physical education running program. The Elementary School Journal, 104, 253-266.

Xiang, P., McBride, R., & Bruene, A. (2006). Fourth graders' motivational changes in an elementary physical education running program. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 77, 195-207.

Xiang, P., McBride, R., & Guan, J. (2004). Children's motivation in elementary physical education: A longitudinal study. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 75, 71-80.

Xiang, P., McBride, R., Guan, J., & Solmon, M.A. (2003). Children's motivation in elementary physical education: An expectancy-value model of achievement choice. Research Quarterly for Sport and Exercise, 74, 25-35.

Zimmerman, B.J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25 (1), 82-91.

Zimmerman, B.J., & Risemberg, R. (1997). Self-regulatory dimensions of academic learning and motivation. In G. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of academic learning (pp. 105-125). New York: Academic Press.

Zan Gao and Maria Newton

University of Utah 

Address Correspondence to: Zan Gao, Ph.D, Department of Exercise and Sport Science, 250 South 1850 East, Room 205, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112-0920, Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone], E-mail: [e-mail]

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics, Internal Reliabilities, and
Correlations among Variables (N = 194).

    Variable         1        2        3        4        5       6

1. Importance        0.87
2. Interest        .31 **     0.86
3. Usefulness      .41 **   .48 **     0.87
4. Self-efficacy   .41 **   .53 **   .37 **     0.84
5. Strategy use    .28 **   .38 **   .38 **   .44 **     0.86
6. Persistence/    .33 **   .56 **   .41 **   .53 **   .47 **   0.85
   effort
M                    3.60     3.99     3.36     4.06     3.57   5.17
SD                    .94      .83      .97      .64      .73   1.35

Note. Cronbach alpha coefficients are provided along the diagonal.
M = mean; SD = standard deviation. * p < .01; ** p < .0001.