Effects of Sport Education Model on Meaningful Experiences in Physical Education and (De)Motivating Teaching Approaches

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the effects of a basketball teaching unit based on the Sport Education Model on students’ meaningful experiences in Physical Education and their perceptions of (de)motivating teaching approaches used by their Physical Education teachers. A total of 102 secondary school students (49 girls; M_age = 13.66, SD = 0.72) participated in a pre-experimental, single group pretest-posttest design. Students completed the Meaningful Physical Education Scale and the Situation-in-School-Physical Education questionnaire before and after an eight-session intervention implemented by a pre-service teacher. Data were analyzed using mixed 2 (Time: pre, post) × 2 (Sex: male, female) MANOVAs and follow-up ANOVAs. The multivariate analyses revealed no significant overall Time × Sex interaction effects for either meaningful PE dimensions or (de)motivating teaching approaches. At the univariate level, significant improvements were observed in social interaction and challenge dimensions of meaningful PE, along with increased perceptions of autonomy-supportive and structuring teaching approaches and reduced controlling and awaiting approaches. However, univariate analyses showed specific sex-related differences: boys reported greater improvements in fun, challenge, and personally relevant learning, whereas girls perceived their teacher as displaying more clarifying behaviors. These findings suggest that the Sport Education Model fosters meaningful and motivating learning environments for both sexes, though the nature of these improvements may vary slightly between boys and girls.

1. Introduction

For decades, Physical Education (PE) has been grounded in traditional models, in which students assumed a passive role in their learning process and had limited agency in decision-making. These traditional models were based on demonstration of skills and repeated drills, which could be monotonous and lower in quality of learning (Y. Chu et al., 2022). In line with Kirk (2020) and Casey and Kirk (2020), these models have three ongoing concerns in integration of low-skilled students, the short learning units and the lack of inclusivity for a diverse range of learners.

To overcome these concerns, pedagogical models in PE emerged in the 1980s, proposing a significant methodological shift toward student-centered approaches, which have progressively influenced students’ experiences by granting them a more active role in their learning process (Casey, 2014). Students would have the opportunity to take greater responsibility in decision-making, autonomy in the learning process and integration of lifelong values associated with Physical Activity (PA) (Fernández-Río et al., 2016).

In PE, four main pedagogical models have been consolidated over recent decades (i.e., Cooperative Learning, Sport Education Model, Teaching Games for Understanding and Personal and Social Responsibility) (Casey & Kirk, 2020). Among them, a recent review highlights the Sport Education Model (SEM) as particularly effective in promoting learning across physical, cognitive, emotional, and social domains (Fernández-Río & Iglesias, 2022). Despite its theoretical strengths, teachers often struggle to create authentic, engaging, and motivating learning environments during SEM-based units (Fernández-Río & Iglesias, 2022). In this regard, examining students’ meaningful experiences and (de)motivating teaching approaches adopted by teachers may offer valuable insights into the motivational mechanisms through which the SEM fosters or hinders learning (Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025). Yet, few studies have explored this connection. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the effects of a SEM-based teaching unit on students’ meaningful experiences and their perceptions of teaching approaches.

1.1. SEM and Its Benefits on Students’ Outcomes

SEM is a pedagogical model proposed by Daryl Siedentop in response to the limitations of the traditional model to generate authentic and holistic sport experiences (Siedentop et al., 2011). SEM seeks to bridge the essential characteristics of sport with necessary educational adaptations, aiming to promote the holistic development of students across motor, cognitive, emotional and social domains (García-López & Gutiérrez Díaz del Campo, 2017; Siedentop et al., 2011). The main goal of the model is to give responsibilities and autonomy to the students to experience holistic sport experiences which develop their competence, sport culture and enthusiasm for sport participation (Fernández-Río et al., 2016; Siedentop et al., 2011). This includes not only the ability to participate successfully in games, but also a solid understanding of rules, and an active involvement in preserving, promoting and enhancing sport culture within the educational context (García-López & Gutiérrez Díaz del Campo, 2017; Siedentop, 1994; Siedentop et al., 2011).

SEM integrates six essential characteristics of sport (García-López & Gutiérrez Díaz del Campo, 2017; Siedentop, 1994). First, season, which is structured through longer teaching units than conventional ones. Concretely, the intervention duration should have more than 12–14 lessons (Fernández-Río et al., 2018), and no more than 18 lessons (Yao et al., 2025), but in educational contexts is difficult, so authors recommend a minimum of eight lessons (Fernández-Río et al., 2018). This allows students to assume roles and responsibilities, participate autonomously, develop a sense of belonging and improve performance, what is reflected in an authentic and holistic sporting experience. Second, formal competition, which follows a structured format that includes preseason phase, a main phase involving formal tournaments or leagues, and a final event. Third, affiliation, developed through fixed teams maintained throughout the unit. These teams foster a sense of belonging and promote cooperation by working toward shared goals. Fourth, record keeping, which allows tracking of both individual and team progress, provides motivation and helps to construct a sporting identity by reinforcing students’ sense of belonging, continuity, and recognition within the team and the season. Finally, festivity and culminating event in the last unit lesson, where each team shows its identity through rituals and symbols (e.g., team names, uniforms, chants, or celebratory routines).

Several studies have demonstrated the benefits of SEM-based interventions in PE. In line with Self-Determination Theory (SDT; Ryan & Deci, 2017), SEM positively influences students’ motivational processes by fostering learning environments that satisfy basic psychological needs (BPN) and promote more self-determined forms of motivation, regardless of sex or disability (Evangelio et al., 2015, 2018; Guijarro et al., 2020). For example, a 12-lesson basketball SEM-based unit in Advanced Level demonstrated more improvements than a traditional model in intrinsic motivation and identified regulation, along with reductions in external regulation and amotivation, which could lead to positive outcomes such as greater interest in sport participation and in PA practice during their leisure time (Burgueño et al., 2017). Among their benefits, SEM promotes positive outcomes, such as emotional (e.g., enjoyment, enthusiasm, engagement), physical (e.g., autonomous sport practice and more attitudes toward physical learning which could help counteract the current trend of PA dropout among adolescents, technical and game performance), cognitive (e.g., PE learning outcomes as tactical and technical knowledge, problem-solving and decision-making) and personal and social benefits (e.g., personal and social responsibility, affiliation, cooperation, empathy, fair-play, empowerment, leadership and assertiveness) (Bessa et al., 2019, 2021; T. L. Chu & Zhang, 2018; Franco et al., 2021; Manninen & Campbell, 2022; Tendinha et al., 2021; T. Wallhead & O’Sullivan, 2005; Yao et al., 2025; Zhang et al., 2024).

1.2. A Circumplex Model: Effects of (De)Motivating Teaching Approaches on Students’ Outcomes

While the SEM has shown potential to promote positive learning and motivational outcomes (Evangelio et al., 2015, 2018; Guijarro et al., 2020), these effects may also be influenced by the (de)motivating teaching approaches adopted by the teacher (Vasconcellos et al., 2020; White et al., 2021). These approaches encompass the ways in which teachers interact with students, manage the class and deliver instruction during PE lessons. Grounded in SDT, the recent development of the circumplex approach (Aelterman et al., 2019; Escriva-Boulley et al., 2021) offers a refined and integrated theoretical framework for analyzing those (de)motivating teaching styles. This framework is structured into four motivating teaching styles (i.e., autonomy support, structure, control and chaos) divided in eight approaches (i.e., participative, attuning, guiding, clarifying, demanding, domineering, abandoning and awaiting) and organized around two intersecting axes (i.e., need support vs. need thwarting; high directiveness vs. low directiveness).

On the one hand, the autonomy-supportive teaching style (need support, low directiveness) refers to the teacher’s effort to understand and nurture students’ interests, fostering voluntary engagement. This style is expressed through a participative approach (i.e., identifying students’ personal interests and providing opportunities for decision-making) and an attuning approach (i.e., adapting tasks to nurture students’ interests by making activities more engaging and meaningful) (Aelterman et al., 2019; Escriva-Boulley et al., 2021). The structuring teaching style (need support, high directiveness) relates to the teacher’s guidance and assistance, which are adapted to students’ capabilities to help them feel competent in their tasks. It is manifested through a guiding approach (i.e., offering help when needed and reflecting on mistakes together) and a clarifying approach (i.e., clearly communicating lesson expectations and monitoring students’ progress) (Aelterman et al., 2019; Escriva-Boulley et al., 2021). On the other hand, the controlling teaching style (need thwarting, high directiveness) refers to the teacher’s pressure on students to behave in a prescribed and imposed manner. It is displayed through a demanding approach (i.e., using commanding language and threatening with sanctions) and a domineering approach (i.e., exerting power over students, including inducing feelings of shame and guilt) (Aelterman et al., 2019; Escriva-Boulley et al., 2021). Finally, the chaotic teaching style (need thwarting, low directiveness) relates to a laissez-faire form of teaching, which creates confusion among students about how they should behave. This style is revealed through an abandoning approach (i.e., giving up on students and placing the responsibility for learning on them) and an awaiting approach (i.e., minimal planning and leaving full initiative to the students) (Aelterman et al., 2019; Escriva-Boulley et al., 2021).

Based on SDT (Ryan & Deci, 2017), teachers’ (de)motivating approaches play a crucial role in shaping students’ motivational processes in PE. Autonomy-supportive and structuring styles, which support BPN, are consistently associated with higher levels of autonomous motivation and positive outcomes, such as engagement, enjoyment, and meaningful experiences in PE (Aelterman et al., 2019; Burgueño et al., 2024; Vasconcellos et al., 2020; White et al., 2021). In contrast, controlling and chaotic styles, which thwart students’ BPN, are linked to higher levels of controlled motivation and amotivation, as well as maladaptive outcomes such as boredom, disengagement, or negative affect (Aelterman et al., 2019; Burgueño et al., 2024; White et al., 2021). The way teachers apply different pedagogical models can shape the (de)motivating teaching approaches they display in their lessons. Traditional technical models based on teacher-centered approaches are associated with BPN-thwarting approaches (e.g., demanding and domineering). In this way, controlling feedback, excessive personal control and intimidatory behaviors such as public evaluation and humiliation, tend to promote ego-involvement and generate negative outcomes (Bartholomew et al., 2009). In these models, the teacher leads the repetitive execution of technical exercises and dictates decisions through direct instruction, which positions students in a passive role in their learning process (Metzler, 2017; Mosston & Ashworth, 2002). This high level of control may thwart students’ BPN by exerting pressure to behave in specific ways, often producing negative outcomes, as oppositional defiance (García-González et al., 2023). Conversely, student-centered pedagogical models (e.g., SEM) are more likely to be associated with BPN-supportive approaches (i.e., participative, attuning, guiding and clarifying). SEM incorporates strategies such as competition phases, fixed teams, festive events and data recording, all of which facilitate to active roles for students and provide opportunities for independent decision-making (T. L. Wallhead et al., 2010). Moreover, teachers help and guide students toward achieving meaningful experiences in PE, as well as achieving learning objectives adapted to students’ different skill levels (Mosston & Ashworth, 2002; Saiz-González & Fernández-Río, 2025). Specifically, the use of autonomy-supportive approaches is presented as a key element for more effective and significant development of four domains (i.e., cognitive, physical, social and affective). Particularly, behaviors such as accepting student ideas and contributions (i.e., participative approach), and supporting students’ personal interests and preferences (i.e., attuning approach) have been identified as key factors in the students’ BPN-satisfaction and self-determined motivation (Saiz-González et al., 2024).

1.3. Meaningful Experiences in PE

The emergence of the conceptual framework of meaningful experiences in PE represents a shift toward understanding learning as a personally relevant, emotional, and reflective process. This framework emphasizes the centrality of students’ lived experiences in shaping learning that is perceived as important, memorable, and engaging (Beni et al., 2021). Beyond the traditional focus on motor performance, meaningful PE seeks to promote holistic development across physical, cognitive, social, and affective domains. Such experiences are inherently personal and filled with emotions, perceptions, and reflections that give learning a deeper sense of value (Kretchmar, 2007). Within this perspective, students’ voices and perceptions become essential elements of the teaching–learning process, teachers are encouraged to recognize individual needs, adapt instruction to students’ preferences and competencies, and design lessons that enhance both the educational quality and the perceived value of PE (Ní Chróinín et al., 2023; Saiz-González & Fernández-Río, 2025). Empirical evidence supports the need to prioritize the quality of meaningful experiences over the quantity of activities, helping students to appreciate their PE experiences, transfer their learning, and understand the contribution of PA to lifelong well-being (Beni et al., 2017, 2021; Cañabate et al., 2024; Fernández-Río & Saiz-González, 2023).There are five common characteristics that define meaningful experiences in PE (Beni et al., 2017; Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025; Fernández-Río & Saiz-González, 2023; Fletcher et al., 2021; Kretchmar, 2006). Social interaction refers to promoting positive relationships with peers and teachers (Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025). Fun means feeling immediate enjoyment in the experiences in PE lessons (Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025). Challenge refers to tasks perceived as having an optimal and appropriate level (Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025). Motor competence refers to students’ ability and effectiveness in motor and physical skills in PE (Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025). Personally relevant learning refers to understanding what, why and how it connects to their lives beyond the school (Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025). These five elements are not isolated; rather, they occur through planned and integrated pedagogical experiences, whose goal is to foster deep, memorable, and motivating learning (Ní Chróinín et al., 2018).

Recent literature has presented evidence supporting the positive impact of meaningful experiences in PE. Firstly, to promote such experiences, it is recommended that teachers use autonomy-supportive and student-centered strategies that allow students to set goals and make decisions (Beni et al., 2022). In line with this, Beni et al. (2019) found that the promotion of meaningful experiences in PE is related to BPN satisfaction, which may be associated with choosing PE as an elective subject and experiencing fewer negative experiences in PE (Fernández-Río et al., 2023; Fernández-Río & Saiz-González, 2023). However, there is still a lack of research on the relationship between pedagogical teaching models and meaningful experiences in PE (Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025). Therefore, this study aims to analyze whether pedagogical models, such as SEM, influence these meaningful experiences in PE.

1.4. Sex Variable in (De)Motivating Teaching Approaches and Meaningful Experiences in PE

Previous studies indicate that students’ sex can significantly shape both their meaningful experiences in PE and their perceptions of teachers’ (de)motivating approaches.

In terms of meaningful experiences in PE, male students consistently report higher mean scores across the five dimensions of meaningful PE (social interaction, fun, challenge, motor competence, and personally relevant learning) than female students, with significant differences reported in fun, challenge and motor competence (Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025). Similarly, boys demonstrate higher levels of social interactions, motor competence and personally relevant learning than girls (Beni et al., 2017; Saiz-González et al., 2025). These differences could be due to the sex-based content preferences, so that girls tend to find PE more meaningful when it involves non-sports-based activities, preferring individual, self-expressive and creative tasks (Beni et al., 2017; Clark et al., 2011). Furthermore, motivational aspects differ by sex, as girls often practice for image improvement and weight loss, whereas boys engage for competition, fun and fitness maintenance (Moreno-Murcia et al., 2011).

At the same time, differences also emerge in the perception of (de)motivating teaching approaches. Male students tend to report higher values in their perceptions of their teacher’s chaotic approaches (i.e., abandoning and awaiting) and domineering approach compared to female students (Diloy-Peña et al., 2024). These perceptions may be linked to traditional discourses of masculinity and healthism in PE, alongside performance-oriented objectives, which can generate discomfort and shame in females when they are required to publicly display their bodies and motor performance during PE lessons. This situation may lead to lower perceived motor competence when performing skills in front of others, negative learning experiences, and ultimately increased levels of physical inactivity among female students (Beltrán-Carrillo & Devís-Devís, 2019).

Recent literature advocates for co-educational methodologies aimed to overcome sex stereotypes during PE lessons. Strategies such as minority sports (e.g., colpbol, korfball) have been proposed to foster equitable and inclusive learning environment (Salvatori & Cherubini, 2024). In this study, SEM-based intervention is applied as a tailored pedagogical approach to overcome female barriers (Saiz-González et al., 2025).

1.5. The Present Study

In recent years, pedagogical models in PE have been increasingly adopted to promote students’ holistic development across cognitive, physical, social, and affective domains. Among them, the SEM has received considerable attention for its potential to create authentic, motivating, and inclusive learning environments that emphasize cooperation, responsibility, and enjoyment rather than mere performance or competition (Siedentop et al., 2011). In parallel, the conceptual framework of meaningful experiences in PE has emerged as a complementary approach that highlights the importance of fostering personally relevant, emotionally engaging, and reflective learning experiences in which students take an active role in their learning process (Ní Chróinín et al., 2018). From both perspectives, the teacher plays a central role, as their (de)motivating teaching approaches can shape the quality of students’ experiences, influencing not only their motivation and engagement but also their long-term attitudes toward PA (Vasconcellos et al., 2020; White et al., 2021). Although a growing body of evidence supports the positive effects of the SEM on students’ motivation and learning outcomes, little is known about its relationship with teachers’ (de)motivating teaching approaches and students’ meaningful experiences in PE. Understanding these associations could provide valuable insights into how SEM-based pedagogical practices contribute to more need-supportive and meaningful learning environments. Moreover, some studies have suggested that sex may influence students’ responses to these pedagogical approaches (Araújo et al., 2014; Siedentop et al., 2011). Therefore, the present study aimed to assess the effects of a basketball SEM-based teaching unit on these variables, considering potential sex differences. Specifically, the objectives were: (1) to analyze the effects of the intervention on students’ meaningful experiences in PE; (2) to examine changes in students’ perceptions of (de)motivating teaching approaches; and (3) to explore potential sex differences across study variables. Based on previous research and frameworks, such as SEM (Siedentop et al., 2011), meaningful experiences in PE (Beni et al., 2017), circumplex model (Aelterman et al., 2019) and SDT (Ryan & Deci, 2017), the following hypotheses were proposed: (H1) SEM will improve the levels of students’ meaningful experiences compared to initial perceptions; (H2) SEM will lead to improvements in students’ perceptions of autonomy-supportive and structuring approaches, and to lower levels in controlling and chaotic approaches; and (H3) both female and male students will benefit from a SEM-based intervention, reporting an increase in their perceptions of meaningful PE experiences, autonomy support and structuring approaches, and a descent in controlling and chaotic teaching approaches.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Design and Participants

This study employed a quantitative, pre-experimental design based on a single-group, pretest-posttest structure. The design was longitudinal in nature, as two measurements were taken at different time points (before and after the intervention) with the same participants.

The initial population consisted of 130 s-year secondary school students from a public high school located in Huesca (Spain) The sampling method was non-probabilistic and based on convenience. After applying the inclusion criteria (i.e., attending all sessions of the didactic unit, completing both the pretest and posttest questionnaires, and providing consistent responses) the final sample comprised 102 students (53 boys, 49 girls; M = 13.66, SD = 0.72).

2.2. Variables and Instruments

2.2.1. Meaningful Experiences in Physical Education

Students’ perceptions of meaningful experiences in PE were assessed using the Meaningful Physical Education Scale (MPES: Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025). This instrument consists of 23 items grouped into five dimensions: Social Interaction (e.g., “I feel integrated with my classmates”), Fun (e.g., “I enjoy physical education classes”), Challenge (e.g., “I make an effort in activities that are challenging but achievable for me”), Motor Competence (e.g., “I succeed when performing class activities”), and Personally Relevant Learning (e.g., “I believe the things I learn in class will be useful in my life”). Responses were provided on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).

The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) supported the five-factor structure, showing acceptable model fit: χ² = 1728.796, χ²/df = 5.76, CFI = 0.908, TLI = 0.895, RMSEA = 0.070 (90% CI = 0.055–0.084). The slightly lower fit indices can be reasonably attributed to the relatively small sample size (n = 102), which may have limited the model’s stability and increased the χ²/df ratio, a common occurrence in CFA with modest samples. Nevertheless, the indices fall within acceptable thresholds, supporting the factorial validity of the instrument. In the present study, all subscales showed excellent reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients above 0.85 at both pretest and posttest.

2.2.2. De(Motivating) Teaching Approaches

Students’ perceptions of teachers’ de(motivating) behaviors in PE were evaluated using the Spanish version of the Situation in School-Physical Education questionnaire (SIS-PE; Burgueño et al., 2024). The instrument is based on the circumplex model of teaching approaches (Aelterman et al., 2019) and comprises 12 common classroom situations, each accompanied by four response options describing alternative teacher behaviors. The resulting 48 items are distributed across four overarching de(motivating) styles, each including two specific approaches: Autonomy Support (participative, 4 items; attuning, 8 items), Structure (guiding, 7 items; clarifying, 5 items), Control (demanding, 7 items; domineering, 5 items), and Chaos (abandoning, 8 items; awaiting, 4 items). Students indicated the extent to which each behavior resembled their PE teacher on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all like my teacher) to 4 (very much like my teacher).

CFA of the eight-factor structure yielded acceptable fit indices in the student sample: χ² = 751.076, χ²/df = 11.37, CFI = 0.912, TLI = 0.904, RMSEA = 0.119 (90% CI = 0.092–0.147). Internal consistency was satisfactory for all factors, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients above 0.70.

2.3. Procedure

Data collection took place in two phases: the pretest was conducted in March 2025 and the posttest in May of the same year. Prior to data collection, approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Zaragoza (CEIN_2025_3). The research team contacted the school administration and the PE department to inform them about the objectives and procedures of the study. Written informed consent was secured from parents or legal guardians of all participants, in line with the school’s standard procedures for extracurricular research activities. Students were reminded that participation was voluntary, that responses would remain anonymous and confidential, and that they could withdraw at any time without penalty.

Both questionnaires were administered in paper format during regular PE classes in the school gymnasium, a familiar and quiet environment. Completion took approximately 15–20 min. To ensure data quality, students were instructed carefully beforehand, and members of the research team were present to clarify any questions. Teachers were not involved in the administration process to avoid potential biases.

2.4. Intervention Program

The intervention was implemented by a pre-service teacher. It consisted of an eight-session basketball teaching unit designed under the principles of the SEM and complemented by tactical game situations and real-play scenarios. The main goal was to foster meaningful learning experiences through role assumption, shared responsibility, and participation in authentic sport contexts.

From the first session, students were organized into stable, heterogeneous teams of five to six members. Each team adopted its own identity (name, logo, and uniform) and assumed rotating roles such as coach, referee, scorer, captain, and equipment manager. This structure promoted autonomy, cooperation, and active involvement among all participants.

The sequence of the unit followed the logic of a complete sport season, divided into three phases: a preseason phase (sessions 1–2), focused on introducing the rules and roles, developing basic technical skills, and fostering team cohesion; a regular season phase (sessions 3–6), centered on the progressive development of technical and tactical contents through modified games that emphasized decision-making, teamwork, and responsibility; and a final event phase (sessions 7–8), culminating in a tournament called “Educational NBA”, where teams applied the knowledge and skills acquired during the unit.

Pedagogical strategies focused on promoting autonomy, responsibility, and inclusion. Learning tasks were adapted to students’ skill levels, visual aids and repeated instructions were provided when necessary, and continuous, constructive feedback was emphasized. Specific adaptations were made for students with particular needs (e.g., injury, ADHD, absenteeism), ensuring their meaningful participation through tailored roles such as referee, scorer, or assistant coach.

Table 1. Main contents and methodological goals of each session.

Session	Phase	Main Contents	Methodological Goals
1	Preseason	Introduction to the SEM, creation of teams and roles, basic rules	Promote team cohesion and group identity
2	Preseason	Fundamental technical skills (dribbling, passing, shooting)	Introduce basic techniques through cooperative games
3	Regular season	3v3 modified games with simplified rules	Foster decision-making and cooperation
4	Regular season	Offensive and defensive situations	Develop tactical understanding and communication
5	Regular season	Modified games focusing on space and transitions	Reinforce game comprehension and teamwork
6	Regular season	Tournament preparation and rule review	Encourage responsibility organizational skills
7	Final event	“Educational NBA” tournament—qualifying round	Apply learning outcomes in authentic competitive contexts
8	Final event	“Educational NBA” tournament—finals and closing ceremony	Reinforce sportsmanship reflection, and peer evaluation

summarizes the main contents and methodological goals of each session within the teaching unit.

Overall, the intervention was designed to provide students with an integrated educational experience in which they actively, autonomously, and cooperatively engaged in learning, experiencing sport through a motivating and meaningful approach.

2.5. Fidelity Checking

Fidelity to the SEM was assessed using a 6-item checklist designed to evaluate the teacher’s adherence to the model’s core features (Hastie & Casey, 2014). Following the procedures outlined by Layne and Hastie (2013), the eight sessions of the intervention (four sessions per unit) were observed by the first author and an additional observer, a PE teacher with experience in pedagogical models. The observers achieved 100% inter-observer agreement, confirming that the PE teacher consistently implemented all key aspects outlined in the checklist, thereby demonstrating a high level of fidelity to the model.

2.6. Data Analysis

All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics (v29) and MPlus (v8). Preliminary analyses included the calculation of descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) and internal consistency (Cronbach’s α), with values above 0.70 considered acceptable (Nunnally, 1978).

CFAs were conducted in Mplus to verify the factorial validity of both instruments used in the study: the MPES and the SIS-PE. Model fit was assessed using the following indices and corresponding cut-off criteria: the chi-square to degrees of freedom ratio (χ²/df < 5), the Comparative Fit Index (CFI > 0.90), the Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI > 0.90), and the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA < 0.08).

To test the effects of the intervention while considering sex differences, mixed 2 (Time: pre, post) × 2 (Sex: male, female) MANOVAs were conducted. The first MANOVA included the five dimensions of meaningful PE (social interaction, fun, challenge, motor competence, and personally relevant learning), and the second included the eight (de)motivating teaching approaches (participative, attuning, guiding, clarifying demanding, domineering, abandoning, and awaiting).

Moreover, follow-up univariate repeated-measures ANOVAs were performed to determine which specific variables contributed to the overall effect. For each ANOVA, the F value statistical significance (p < 0.05), and partial eta squared (η²) as an effect size indicator were reported.

Additionally, repeated-measures ANOVAs were conducted separately for male and female students to explore potential sex differences in the effects of the intervention.

3. Results

A mixed 2 (Time: pre, post) × 2 (Sex: male, female) MANOVA was conducted to examine whether the effects of the intervention differed between boys and girls across all study variables.

For the meaningful PE dimensions, the overall multivariate analysis revealed no significant Time × Sex interaction effect when considering the five dimensions jointly. However, as shown in

Table 2. Mixed 2 (Time × Sex) MANOVA results for the meaningful PE dimensions.

Meaningful PE Dimensions	Wilks’ Λ	F	gl1	gl2	p	η2
Social interactions	0.994	0.565	1	100	0.454	0.006
Fun	0.932	7.256	1	100	0.008 *	0.068
Challenge	0.988	1.246	1	100	0.267	0.012
Motor competence	0.992	0.769	1	100	0.383	0.008
Relevant learning	0.978	2.198	1	100	0.141	0.022

Note. Results are considered statistically significant at p < 0.05 *. η² represents partial eta squared (effect size).

, follow-up univariate tests indicated a significant Time × Sex interaction for fun, suggesting that changes in this variable from pre- to posttest differed between boys and girls. No other dimensions of meaningful PE exhibited significant interaction effects.

Regarding the (de)motivating teaching approaches, the overall multivariate test did not reveal a significant Time × Sex interaction effect. As presented in

Table 3. Mixed 2 (Time × Sex) MANOVA results for the (de)motivating teaching approaches.

(De)Motivating Teaching Approaches	Wilks’ Λ	F	gl1	gl2	p	η2
Participative	0.998	0.165	1	100	0.686	0.002
Attuning	1	0.042	1	100	0.838	0.000
Guiding	0.999	0.096	1	100	0.757	0.001
Clarifying	0.992	0.775	1	100	0.381	0.008
Demanding	1	0.012	1	100	0.914	0.000
Domineering	1	0.011	1	100	0.918	0.000
Abandoning	0.997	0.278	1	100	0.599	0.003
Awaiting	0.999	0.092	1	100	0.763	0.001

Note. η² represents partial eta squared (effect size).

, the univariate analyses were consistent with this pattern, indicating that both male and female students perceived similar pre-post changes in their teachers’ motivational behaviors.

Overall, these results suggest that the SEM produced comparable global benefits for boys and girls, although sex-related differences emerged locally in specific variables rather than at the multivariate level.

3.1. Effects on Meaningful Experiences in Physical Education

Following the significant multivariate effect, univariate repeated-measures ANOVAs were performed for each meaningful experiences dimension (

Table 4. Pre- and post-intervention results of the meaningful PE experiences questionnaire dimensions (without sex differentiation).

Variable	Mpre	SDpre	Mpost	SDpost	F	p	η2
Social Interaction	5.57	1.19	5.78	0.996	6.009	0.016 *	0.056
Fun	5.73	0.84	5.83	0.830	1.001	0.319	0.010
Challenge	5.67	0.93	5.86	0.800	5.927	0.017 *	0.055
Motor Competence	5.59	1.08	5.62	1.114	0.107	0.744	0.001
Relevant Learning	5.20	1.08	5.42	1.000	3.269	0.075	0.029

Note. M = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; F = ANOVA F statistic; p = significance value; η² = effect size. p < 0.05 *.

).

At the group level, significant improvements were observed in social interaction and challenge, while no significant differences were found in fun, motor competence, or personally relevant learning.

When the data were analyzed separately by sex (

Table 5. Pre- and post-intervention results of the meaningful PE experiences questionnaire dimensions (male group).

Variable	Mpre	SDpre	Mpost	SDpost	F	p	η2
Social Interaction	5.75	1.03	5.73	1.01	0.004	0.948	0.000
Fun	5.84	0.93	6.19	0.66	12.669	<0.001 ***	0.196
Challenge	5.82	0.93	6.10	0.69	14.192	<0.001 ***	0.214
Motor Competence	5.97	0.91	5.63	1.10	2.970	0.091	0.054
Relevant Learning	5.51	0.87	5.90	0.63	17.035	<0.001 ***	0.247

Note. M = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; F = ANOVA F statistic; p = significance value; η² = effect size. p < 0.001 ***.

and

Table 6. Pre- and post-intervention results of the meaningful PE experiences questionnaire dimensions (female group).

Variable	Mpre	SDpre	Mpost	SDpost	F	p	η2
Social Interaction	5.37	1.33	5.80	0.98	3.494	0.068	0.068
Fun	5.60	1.14	5.43	1.18	1.002	0.322	0.020
Challenge	5.50	1.02	5.60	0.96	0.477	0.493	0.010
Motor Competence	5.17	1.11	5.72	1.05	7.545	0.008 **	0.136
Relevant Learning	4.87	1.27	4.90	1.23	0.020	0.889	<0.001

Note. M = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; F = ANOVA F statistic; p = significance value; η² = effect size. p < 0.01 **.

), boys showed significant increases in fun, challenge, and personally relevant learning. In contrast, girls exhibited a significant improvement only in motor competence, with no other significant changes detected.

3.2. Effects on Perceived (De)Motivating Teaching Approaches

Table 7. Results by (de)motivating teaching approaches (without sex differentiation).

Variables	Mpre	SDpre	Mpost	SDpost	F	p	η2
Autonomy support
Participative	2.46	0.77	2.81	0.79	15.623	<0.001 ***	0.134
Attuning	2.74	0.67	3.08	0.57	33.225	<0.001 ***	0.248
Structure
Guiding	3.09	0.66	3.39	0.50	23.050	<0.001 ***	0.186
Clarifying	3.14	0.52	3.32	0.51	10.013	0.002 **	0.090
Control
Demanding	2.67	0.61	2.39	0.77	13.809	<0.001 ***	0.120
Domineering	2.60	0.70	2.28	0.83	13.378	<0.001 ***	0.117
Chaos
Abandoning	2.02	0.76	1.96	0.85	0.652	0.421	0.006
Awaiting	2.33	0.69	2.15	0.64	4.794	0.031 *	0.045

Note. M = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; F = ANOVA F statistic; p = significance value; η² = effect size. p < 0.05 *; p < 0.01 **; p < 0.001 ***.

presents descriptive statistics and ANOVA results for the (de)motivating teaching approaches. After the intervention, students reported higher perceptions of autonomy-supportive and structuring approaches (participative, attuning, guiding, and clarifying) and lower perceptions of controlling (demanding and domineering) and awaiting approach.

To explore sex differences in the effects of the intervention, separate ANOVAs were conducted for boys and girls. Results indicated that both groups reported significant improvements in autonomy-supportive and structuring approaches, and reductions in controlling approaches (

Table 8. Results by (de)motivating teaching approaches (male group).

Variables	Mpre	SDpre	Mpost	SDpost	F	p	η2
Autonomy support
Participative	2.58	0.74	2.90	0.71	9.717	0.003 **	0.157
Attuning	2.81	0.58	3.14	0.47	20.76	<0.001 ***	0.285
Structure
Guiding	3.09	0.54	3.42	0.43	18.69	<0.001 ***	0.264
Clarifying	3.19	0.52	3.32	0.50	2.683	0.107	0.049
Control
Demanding	2.75	0.63	2.47	0.76	7.642	0.008 **	0.128
Domineering	2.77	0.68	2.44	0.87	7.639	0.008 **	0.128
Chaos
Abandoning	2.19	0.78	2.17	0.90	0.066	0.799	0.001
Awaiting	2.43	0.70	2.23	0.60	4.103	0.048 *	0.073

Note. M = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; F = ANOVA F statistic; p = significance value; η² = effect size. p < 0.05 *; p < 0.01 **; p < 0.001 ***.

and

Table 9. Results by (de)motivating teaching approaches (female group).

Variable	Mpre	SDpre	Mpost	SDpost	F	p	η2
Autonomy support
Participative	2.33	0.79	2.71	0.86	6.735	0.013 *	0.123
Attuning	2.67	0.75	3.03	0.67	13.590	<0.001 ***	0.221
Structure
Guiding	3.08	0.78	3.37	0.58	7.301	0.009 **	0.132
Clarifying	3.09	0.52	3.33	0.52	8.317	0.006 **	0.148
Control
Demanding	2.58	0.58	2.29	0.78	6.161	0.017 *	0.114
Domineering	2.42	0.68	2.11	0.76	5.692	0.021 **	0.106
Chaos
Abandoning	1.84	0.70	1.73	0.74	0.666	0.419	0.014
Awaiting	2.22	0.67	2.07	0.69	1.341	0.253	0.027

Note. M = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; F = ANOVA F statistic; p = significance value; η² = effect size. p < 0.05 *; p < 0.01 **; p < 0.001 ***.

).

However, differences emerged between groups. Boys showed an additional significant decrease in the awaiting approach (p = 0.048), consistent with a greater sensitivity to chaotic teaching behaviors. Girls demonstrated a significant increase in the clarifying approach (p = 0.006), suggesting a preference for clearer guidance and structure during learning.

4. Discussion

Present study aimed to assess the effects of a basketball SEM-based teaching unit on students’ meaningful experiences in PE and their perception of (de)motivating teaching approaches. Additionally, sex differences were examined. Overall, results showed that: (1) At the group level, SEM led to significant improvements in social interaction and challenge; (2) At the group level, students perceived an increase in autonomy-supportive and structuring teaching approaches, alongside a decrease in controlling and awaiting approaches; and (3) sex differences were observed, with girls particularly reported significant improvements in motor competence and clarifying approaches, while boys reported significant gains in fun, challenge, personally relevant learning, and awaiting approaches.

4.1. Improvements in Social Interaction and Challenge at the Group Level with SEM-Based Intervention (H1)

In line with the first hypothesis, this was partially supported, as the SEM led to significant improvements only in social interaction and challenge at the group level. Conversely, no significant changes were observed for fun, motor competence, or personally relevant learning. These findings are consistent with previous research on meaningful experiences in PE (Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025) and align with the core principles of the SEM (Siedentop, 1994).

Firstly, the significant improvement in social interaction aligns with SEM’s structural features, where strategies such as affiliation, festivity, culminating event and stable teams with shared identity could foster the sense of belonging, fostering responsibility, teamwork, cooperation, group cohesion and positive interactions (Fernández-Río & Saiz-González, 2023; Yao et al., 2025). Additionally, this dimension is closely associated with the satisfaction of the need for relatedness, through feelings of belonging and connection to others (Vansteenkiste et al., 2020), identified as one of the key elements of meaningful experiences in PE (Beni et al., 2017). These findings are consistent with previous studies that highlight the positive effects of the SEM on social variables such as students’ prosocial behaviors, civic competence, social values, empathy, assertiveness, fair play, solidarity, respect and ability to share (Evangelio et al., 2018; Hoyo-Guillot et al., 2025).

Secondly, challenge is defined as a progressive and appropriately adjusted task difficulty to students’ skill level (Fernández-Río & Saiz-González, 2023). In this way, SEM would contribute by incorporating rotating roles of responsibility, record keeping, a structured season format, competition and by encouraging effort, perseverance, personal progress and student decision-making in choosing their challenge level (Siedentop, 1994). This dimension of meaningful experiences in PE can foster the competence satisfaction, which is defined as a sense of effectiveness and mastery of task objectives (Vansteenkiste et al., 2020). Previous reviews indicate that SEM is more need-supportive and better promotes intrinsic motivation compared to skill-drill, direct and traditional models in PE, particularly by helping students to feel a greater sense of competence (Bessa et al., 2019; Manninen & Campbell, 2022; Zhang et al., 2024).

Finally, at the group level, there were not significative differences in fun, motor competence or personally relevant learning. This may be because these dimensions require more specific and prolonged intervention to show significant changes. On the one hand, fun could be limited by the competition phase of the season, especially if it was not managed adequately. It could generate pressure and performance goals, although mastery-oriented climate was the most prevalent (Hastie et al., 2011). On the other hand, motor competence is defined by students’ ability to achieve success in learning activities (Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025). Therefore, it is possible that the limited duration of the teaching unit, combined with the cooperative and playful approach of the SEM, was insufficient to produce a clear improvement in motor competence, as the model places more emphasis on the season structure, roles and decision-making rather than on repetitive practice. Previous research highlights the need for longer units with an effective planning of the season to allow for meaningful experiences, and impact of time on students’ learning outcomes, suggesting that SEM units lasting more than 12–14 lessons but no more than 18 lessons or the application of multiple units over time may be necessary to achieve significant improvements in student learning (Araújo et al., 2014; Fernández-Río et al., 2018; Siedentop, 1994; Yao et al., 2025). However, this SEM-based intervention has only eight lessons, because it is difficult in an educational context to dictate the number of units (Fernández-Río et al., 2018). Finally, personally relevant learning is defined as fostering meaningful learning and understanding the purpose of what is learned in PE, enabling students to transfer knowledge to their daily lives (Fernández-Río & Saiz-González, 2023). This dimension requires reflective moments and connections to students’ personal interests, which may have been limited in this teaching unit because students did not choose basketball as the instructional content. In school contexts, curricular requirements often restrict students’ control over content selection, and teachers must ensure pedagogical coherence and curricular alignment, which requires a solid understanding of the specific sport being taught and may limit flexibility when connecting content to individual interests (Araújo et al., 2014; Burgueño & Diloy-Peña, 2025; Fernández-Río & Saiz-González, 2023).

4.2. Improvements in Autonomy-Supportive and Structuring Teaching Approaches, and Reductions in Controlling and Awaiting Approaches (H2)

According to the second hypothesis, it was partially confirmed at the group level, as the SEM-based teaching unit led to significant improvements in autonomy-supportive and structuring teaching approaches, along with reductions in controlling and awaiting approaches. Conversely, no significant changes were observed in the abandoning approach. These findings highlight the influence of teachers’ (de)motivating approaches on the creation of meaningful experiences in PE (Fernández-Río & Saiz-González, 2023) and they are aligned with the core principles of the SEM (Siedentop, 1994).

Firstly, students reported improvements in the autonomy-supportive approaches (i.e., participative and attuning). In the context of SEM, these approaches can be observed when students are encouraged to take responsibility for decision-making through role assignment (e.g., coach, referee, captain), contribute to team strategies, or participate in organizing the culminating event (Siedentop, 1994). Similarly, attuning approaches emerge when teachers adapt tasks and challenges to the skill level or interests of each team, ensuring that all students experience success and engagement throughout the season. This alignment between the SEM structure and autonomy-supportive teaching fosters a climate of voluntary participation and personal relevance, conditions that are known to promote meaningful experiences in PE (Beni et al., 2022; Fernández-Río & Saiz-González, 2023). Previous studies have also shown that SEM-based PE lessons enhance students’ autonomy and enjoyment, which in turn foster more self-determined motivation through increased responsibility and engagement (Tendinha et al., 2021).

Secondly, students reported improvements in the structuring teaching approaches (i.e., guiding and clarifying). These approaches of the circumplex model are closely linked to competence satisfaction (Vansteenkiste et al., 2020) of SDT, and motor competence, personally relevant learning and challenge dimensions of meaningful experiences in PE (Beni et al., 2017). SEM supports these approaches by offering a structured and logical task sequence in various season phases, adapting the difficulty of the tasks to students’ level of ability, offering the opportunity to select roles, obtaining knowledge of sport rules, recording keeping and providing tailored feedback aimed at achieving learning goals (Yao et al., 2025). Especially, record keeping gives the opportunity to track both individual and team progress, thereby facilitating continuous monitoring of learning development (Siedentop, 1994). Also, some tasks included tactical and game-based situations, where open and productive teaching styles encouraged decision-making and competence development (Fernández-Río & Saiz-González, 2023).

Thirdly, students reported a reduction in the controlling teaching approaches (i.e., demanding and domineering). Within the SEM, this decrease can be explained by its emphasis on student responsibility and shared decision-making. For instance, students are encouraged to take initiative within their assigned roles, collaborate democratically in team discussions, and reflect collectively after matches, which reduces the need for teacher-imposed discipline or coercion (Fernández-Río & Saiz-González, 2023; Mosston & Ashworth, 2002). Throughout the different phases of the season, feedback tends to be constructive and oriented toward improvement rather than control or punishment, fostering a learning environment based on respect, trust, and autonomy. This structure allows the teacher to guide rather than impose, promoting students’ self-regulation and reducing the presence of controlling approaches in the classroom.

Finally, students reported a significant reduction in the awaiting approach, but not in the abandoning approach. This finding can be explained by the structured and purposeful nature of the SEM, in which each lesson contributes to the progression of the season and teachers remain actively involved in monitoring students’ roles and team performance (Siedentop, 1994). For example, the clear organization of the different phases, introduction, practice, regular competition, and final event, encourages teacher guidance and minimizes moments of inactivity or lack of direction, reducing the likelihood of awaiting situations. However, the absence of change in the abandoning approach could be related to the relatively short duration of the intervention, as an eight-lesson unit may not have been sufficient for teachers to fully consolidate these practices. Previous research has shown that longer SEM-based units, ranging from 12 to 14 lessons and no more than 18, are often needed for students to internalize their roles, responsibilities, and sport-related competencies (Burgueño et al., 2017; Bessa et al., 2019; Fernández-Río et al., 2018; Yao et al., 2025).

4.3. Sex Differences of Meaningful Experiences in PE and Perceived (De)Motivating Teaching Approaches (H3)

The third hypothesis was partially confirmed, as both female and male students benefitted from a SEM-based intervention in their perceptions of meaningful PE experiences and motivating teaching approaches and reported a decrease in controlling teaching approaches. However, differences emerged in both frameworks to male and female students. Boys reported significant improvements in fun, challenge, and personally relevant learning, whereas girls showed gains only in motor competence. Both genders improved in autonomy-supportive teaching approaches (i.e., participative and attuning) and guiding approach, alongside a decrease in controlling teaching approaches (i.e., demanding and domineering). However, boys also showed reductions in the awaiting approach, while girls reported an increase in clarifying approaches. These results suggest that the SEM-based unit produced positive but differentiated effects depending on sex.

Regarding meaningful experiences, boys experienced greater improvements in the affective and cognitive dimensions (i.e., fun, challenge and personally relevant learning), which may be explained by the sport-based nature of the intervention. Previous literature has found similar findings, where boys reported higher scores than girls in personally relevant learning (Saiz-González et al., 2025). This difference could be due to boys’ higher expectations regarding the lesson content, as basketball tends to be more appealing to boys, who generally value competition, challenge, and enjoyment—key elements of the SEM (Beni et al., 2017; Clark et al., 2011; Moreno-Murcia et al., 2011). In contrast, girls improved in motor competence, possibly due to the inclusive and coeducational structure of the SEM, which promotes equitable participation in smaller groups, shared responsibilities, cooperative tasks and role rotation (Saiz-González et al., 2025). These characteristics help to reduce gender stereotypes and insecurities regarding physical abilities, frequently reported among female students (Salvatori & Cherubini, 2024). Furthermore, the model’s structured phases and ongoing teacher support provided girls with a safe and scaffolded learning environment to refine skills and tactical decision-making (Mesquita et al., 2012).

Concerning perceived (de)motivating teaching approaches, both genders showed improvements consistent with the overall trend at the group level, greater autonomy support and structure, and reduced control, indicating that the SEM fosters a more need-supportive motivational climate. However, some gender-specific nuances emerged. Boys reported a decrease in the awaiting approach, which may reflect a more active involvement during lessons and a reduced perception of teacher passivity. This aligns with previous evidence suggesting that boys tend to perceive higher levels of chaotic styles (Aelterman et al., 2019). The SEM’s clear organization and continuous feedback might have helped counteract these perceptions by providing structure and clear goals. Conversely, girls reported an increase in the clarifying approach, showing greater appreciation for transparent instructions and well-structured tasks. This preference could be linked to a stronger need for guidance and reassurance, as structure contributes to competence satisfaction and self-determined motivation (Burgueño et al., 2020). Moreover, the explicit and supportive teaching provided by the SEM may have mitigated traditional masculine discourses and performance-oriented climates in PE, fostering comfort and engagement among female students (Beltrán-Carrillo & Devís-Devís, 2019).

4.4. Limitations and Future Research

Although this study showed novel results, several limitations should be noted. Firstly, the use of a non-probabilistic purposive sampling method and the implementation of the intervention by a single pre-service teacher, who taught the entire sample of students across different class groups within the same school, limit the generalizability of the findings. Therefore, future studies should consider including larger and more diverse samples of students, and the inclusion of a representative sample of active teachers. In addition, the absence of a control group following a traditional teaching model prevents establishing causal relationships between the intervention and the observed outcomes, as the influence of maturation or other contextual variables cannot be entirely ruled out. Future research should therefore prioritize the inclusion of control or comparison groups to allow stronger causal inferences regarding the effects of SEM-based interventions. Secondly, this study focused solely on basketball content, which limits the generalization of the findings to other PE contents. In addition, the intervention was implemented by a single pre-service teacher, and teacher-related characteristics may have influenced the observed outcomes. Future studies should therefore examine SEM-based teaching units across different sports and involve multiple teachers with varying levels of professional experience. Thirdly, this intervention consisted of an eight-lesson teaching unit. Futures studies should consider implementing longer interventions to examine the sustained impact of SEM, potentially extending across multiple academic years to investigate the influence of mature, contextual and personal factors. Moreover, students’ perceptions were collected using self-reported instruments, which may be affected by biases such as social desirability and provide a predominantly perceptual perspective of the learning experience. Future research should therefore incorporate mixed-method approaches, including qualitative, observational, and objective measures, to gain a more comprehensive understanding of students’ experiences. Finally, external validity is limited by the use of a convenience sample from a single school and the implementation of the intervention by one pre-service teacher, which restricts the generalizability of the findings. Future research should include larger and more diverse samples across multiple educational contexts and teaching profiles.

4.5. Implications for Teaching Practice

The findings of this study provide coherent and actionable insights for enhancing teaching practices in PE through the SEM. First, the results show that the key elements of SEM, such as stable teams, role rotation, formal competition, progress recording, and final festivities, offer a solid pedagogical framework to promote the five components of meaningful PE: social interaction, challenge, personally relevant learning, fun, and motor competence. To maximize their potential, it is essential for teachers to adopt motivating teaching approaches (i.e., participative, attuning, guiding, and clarifying), while avoiding, domineering and awaiting ones, from the circumplex model that align with the different elements of SEM.

Second, structuring the unit around stable teams with a shared identity enhances affiliation, cooperation, and a sense of belonging, thereby strengthening social interaction and shared enjoyment. Role rotation (e.g., captain, referee, journalist, or coach) allows all students to experience different levels of responsibility and contribute to the functioning of the group, increasing the personal relevance of learning. These practices benefit from a participative approach, which encourages shared decision-making, and an attuning approach, which considers students’ interests and preferences. Likewise, providing explanations that give meaning to tasks and clearly communicating objectives and success criteria, characteristic of the clarifying approach, foster understanding and engagement. Conversely, when teachers act in a controlling and obligatory manner (demanding approach) or lessons lack structure and clear goals (awaiting approach), students’ perception of learning relevance diminishes.

Similarly, designing tasks with progressive levels of difficulty and providing tailored feedback promote fair challenge and motor competence. Applying strategies typical of the guiding and attuning approaches, such as offering task options, setting achievable goals, and recognizing individual progress, helps students view challenges as opportunities for improvement rather than sources of frustration. In contrast, imposing a single way of acting without considering group diversity (demanding approach) or leaving planning to change (awaiting approach) undermines students’ sense of appropriate challenge and can lead to boredom or disengagement. Likewise, an authoritarian (domineering) use of power or lack of teacher involvement (abandoning approach) erodes students’ perception of competence.

In addition, maintaining a clear and predictable structure throughout the lessons, avoiding long waiting times and disorganization (chaotic approach), helps sustain a positive classroom climate and students’ effort throughout the unit. Furthermore, competitions and final festivities should be conceived as opportunities to celebrate collective effort and learning rather than as mere performance evaluations. In this sense, structuring teaching practices, with a degree of direction but without becoming controlling, allows teachers to combine competitive intensity with respect and cooperation, reinforcing fun and enjoyment without generating pressure.

Overall, integrating the SEM with the principles of meaningful PE and the strategies derived from circumplex model offers teachers a practical, structured, and motivating framework for designing lessons that combine cooperation, challenge, enjoyment, and educational meaning. Implementing these evidence-based orientations can contribute, not only to improving teaching quality, but also to strengthening students’ engagement, motivation and well-being in PE.

5. Conclusions

This study further supports the previously demonstrated benefits of SEM-based interventions and their potential to generate meaningful experiences in PE and to improve motivating teaching approaches perceived by students, independent of the sex.

This intervention implemented by a pre-service teacher achieved notable benefits, although he was in his initial teacher training, with limited experience in real classroom context or with little simulated experience for his four years of initial training. Despite this, he benefitted from specific training in pedagogical models’ programs. This education contributed to improving his motivating teaching approaches and to creating students’ meaningful experiences in PE. So that, it is important to incorporate these training programs from initial training to ensure that future educators enter the profession equipped to create meaningful and inclusive learning PE environments from the outset.