Advertisement

Autonomy-Supportive Teaching: What It Is, How to Do It

  • Johnmarshall ReeveEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Autonomy-supportive teaching strongly predicts positive functioning in both the students who receive autonomy support and the teachers who give it. Recognizing this, the present paper provides conceptual and operational definitions of autonomy support (to explain what it is) and offers step-by-step guidelines of how to put it into practice during classroom instruction (to explain how to do it). The focus is on the following six empirically validated autonomy-supportive instructional behaviors that, together, constitute the autonomy-supportive motivating style: take the students’ perspective, vitalize inner motivational resources, provide explanatory rationales, acknowledge and accept negative affect, rely on informational and nonpressuring language, and display patience. For each act of instruction, I define what it is, articulate when it is most needed during instruction, explain why it is educationally important, and provide examples and recommendations of how to put it into practice.

Keywords

Negative Affect Autonomy Support Perspective Taking Harmonious Passion Teaching Efficacy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Abuhamdeh, S., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Jalal, B. (2015). Enjoying the possibility of defeat: Outcome uncertainty, suspense, and intrinsic motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 39, 1–10.Google Scholar
  2. Assor, A., Kaplan, H., Kanat-Maymon, Y., & Roth, G. (2005). Directly controlling teacher behaviors as predictors of poor motivation and engagement in girls and boys: The role of anger and anxiety. Learning and Instruction, 15, 397–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Assor, A., Kaplan, H., & Roth, G. (2002). Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy-enhancing and suppressing teaching behaviors predicting students’ engagement in schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 27, 261–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Assor, A., Roth, G., & Deci, E. L. (2004). The emotional costs of perceived parental conditional regard: A self-determination theory analysis. Journal of Personality, 72, 47–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barber, B. K. (2002). Intrusive parenting: How psychological control affects children and adolescents. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  6. Bartholomew, K. J., Ntoumanis, N., Ryan, R. M., Bosch, J. A., & Thogersen-Ntoumani, C. (2011). Self-determination theory and diminished functioning: The role of interpersonal control and psychological need thwarting. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1459–1473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cheon, S. H., & Reeve, J. (2013). Do the benefits from autonomy-supportive PE teacher training programs endure?: A one-year follow-up investigation. Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 14, 508–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheon, S. H., & Reeve, J. (2014). A classroom-based intervention to help teachers decrease student amotivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 40, 99–111.Google Scholar
  9. Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., & Moon, I. S. (2012). Experimentally based, longitudinally designed, teacher-focused intervention to help physical education teachers be more autonomy supportive toward their students. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 34, 365–396.Google Scholar
  10. Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., Yu, T. H., & Jang, H. R. (2014). Teacher benefits from giving students autonomy support during physical education instruction. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 36, 331–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., Lee, J., & Lee, Y. (2015). Giving and receiving autonomy support in a high-stakes sport context: A field-based experiment during the 2012 London Paralympic Games. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 19, 1–11.Google Scholar
  12. Chua, S. N., Wong, N., & Koestner, R. (2014). Autonomy and controlling support are two sides of the same coin. Personality and Individual Differences, 68, 48–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clifford, M. M. (1990). Students need challenge, not easy success. Educational Leadership, 48, 22–26.Google Scholar
  14. Davis, M. H. (2004). Empathy: Negotiating the border between self and other. In L. Z. Tiedens & C. W. Leach (Eds.), The social life of emotions (pp. 19–42). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Deci, E. L. (1995). Why we do what we do: Understanding self-motivation. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  16. Deci, E. L., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B. C., & Leone, D. R. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Personality, 62, 119–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Deci, E. L., Schwartz, A., Sheinman, L., & Ryan, R. M. (1981). An instrument to assess adult’s orientations toward control versus autonomy in children: Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 642–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Deci, E. L., Spiegel, N. H., Ryan, R. M., Koestner, R., & Kauffman, M. (1982). Effects of performance standards on teaching styles: Behavior of controlling teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 852–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Edmunds, J., Ntoumanis, N., & Duda, J. L. (2008). Testing a self-determination theory-based teaching style intervention in the exercise domain. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 375–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Haerens, L., Aelterman, N., Vansteenkiste, M., Soenens, B., & Van Petegem, S. (2015). Do perceived autonomy-supportive and controlling teaching relate to physical education students’ motivational experiences through unique pathways? Distinguishing between the bright and dark side of motivation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 16, 26–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jang, H. (2008). Supporting students’ motivation, engagement, and learning during an uninteresting activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 798–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jang, H. (2015). Three empirical illustrations of a teacher’s use of curiosity-inducing strategies to promote students’ motivation, engagement, and learning. Manuscript under review.Google Scholar
  24. Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Halusic, M. (2015). A new autonomy-supportive instructional strategy that increases conceptual learning: Teaching in students’ preferred ways. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  25. Keller, J., & Bless, H. (2008). Flow and regulatory compatibility: An experimental approach to the flow model of intrinsic motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 196–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Koestner, R., Ryan, R. M., Bernieri, F., & Holt, K. (1984). Setting limits on children’s behavior: The differential effects of controlling versus informational styles on intrinsic motivation and creativity. Journal of Personality, 52, 233–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. La Guardia, J. G., & Patrick, H. (2008). Self-determination theory as a fundamental theory of close relationships. Canadian Psychology, 49, 201–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lee, W., & Reeve, J. (2012). Teacher’s estimates of their students’ motivation and engagement: Being in synch with students. Educational Psychology, 32, 727–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Loewenstein, G. (1994). The psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretation. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 75–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nix, G. A., Ryan, R. M., Manly, J. B., & Deci, E. L. (1999). Revitalization through self-regulation: The effects of autonomous and controlled motivation on happiness and vitality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 266–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Noels, K. A., Clement, R., & Pelletier, L. G. (1999). Perceptions of teachers’ communicative style and students’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Modern Language Journal, 83, 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Proyer, R. T., Ruch, W., & Buschor, C. (2013). Testing strengths-based interventions: A preliminary study on the effectiveness of a program targeting curiosity, gratitude, hope, humor, and zest for enhancing life satisfaction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14, 275–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44, 159–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reeve, J., & Cheon, H. S. (2014). An intervention-based program of research on teachers’ motivating styles. In S. Karabenick & T. Urdan’s (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 18, pp. 297–343). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.Google Scholar
  35. Reeve, J., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Self-determination theory: A dialectical framework for understanding the sociocultural influences on student motivation. In D. McInerney & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Research on sociocultural influences on motivation and learning: Big theories revisited (Vol. 4, pp. 31–59). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Press.Google Scholar
  36. Reeve, J., & Jang, H. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students’ autonomy during learning activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 209–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Reeve, J., Jang, H., Carrell, D., Jeon, S., & Barch, J. (2004). Enhancing high school students’ engagement by increasing their teachers’ autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion, 28, 147–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Reeve, J., Jang, H., Hardre, P., & Omura, M. (2002). Providing a rationale in an autonomy-supportive way as a motivational strategy to motivate others during an uninteresting activity. Motivation and Emotion, 26, 183–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Reeve, J., Lee, W., & Won, S. (2015). Interest as emotion, as affect, and as schema (Chapter 5). In K. A. Renninger, M. Nieswandt, & S. Hidi (Eds.), Interest in mathematics and science learning (pp. 79–92). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  40. Rogers, C. R. (1995). What understanding and acceptance mean to me. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 35, 7–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Roth, G., Assor, A., Niemiec, C. P., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2009). The emotional and academic consequences of parental conditional regard: Comparing conditional positive regard, conditional negative regard, and autonomy support as parenting practices. Developmental Psychology, 45, 1119–1142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ryan, R. M. (1982). Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 450–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ryan, R. M., & Powelson, C. L. (1991). Autonomy and relatedness as fundamental to motivation and education. Journal of Experimental Education, 60, 49–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sameroff, A. (Ed.). (2009). The transactional model of development: How children and contexts shape each other. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  46. Schraw, G., Flowerday, T., & Lehman, S. (2001). Increasing situational interest in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 211–224.Google Scholar
  47. Silvia, P. J. (2006). Exploring the psychology of interest. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Silvia, P. J. (2008). Interest: The curious emotion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 57–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Soenens, B., Park, S. Y., Vansteenkiste, M., & Mouratidis, A. (2012). Perceived parental psychological control and adolescent depressive experiences: A cross-cultural study with Belgian and South-Korean adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 35, 261–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tessier, D., Sarrazin, P., & Ntoumanis, N. (2008). The effects of an experimental programme to support students’ autonomy on the overt behaviours of physical education teachers. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 23, 239–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Intrinsic versus extrinsic goal contents in self-determination theory: Another look at the quality of academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 41, 19–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Motivated learning, performance, and persistence: The synergistic role of intrinsic goals and autonomy-support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 246–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Soenens, B., & Matos, L. (2005). Examining the motivational impact of intrinsic versus extrinsic goal framing and autonomy-supportive versus internally controlling communication style on early adolescents’ academic achievement. Child Development, 2, 483–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Soenens, B., & Lens, W. (2004). How to become a persevering exerciser? Providing a clear, future intrinsic goal in an autonomy supportive way. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 26, 232–249.Google Scholar
  55. Williams, G. C., & Deci, E. L. (1996). Internalization of biopsychosocial values by medical students: A test of self-determination theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 767–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Korea UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations