Equestrianism is currently facing a range of pressing challenges. These challenges, which are largely based on evolving attitudes to ethics and equine wellbeing, have consequences for the sport’s social licence to operate. The factors that may have contributed to the current situation include overarching societal trends, specific aspects of the equestrian sector, and factors rooted in human nature. If equestrianism is to flourish, it is evident that much needs to change, not the least,human behaviour. To this end, using established behaviour change frameworks that have been scientifically validated and are rooted in practice — most notably, Michie et al.’s COM-B model and Behaviour Change Wheel — could be of practical value for developing and implementing equine welfare strategies. This review summarises the theoretical underpinnings of some behaviour change frameworks and provides a practical, step-by-step approach to designing an effective behaviour change intervention. A real-world example is provided through the retrospective analysis of an intervention strategy that aimed to increase the use of learning theory in (educational) veterinary practice. We contend that the incorporation of effective behaviour change interventions into any equine welfare improvement strategy may help to safeguard the future of equestrianism.
MULTIFILE
This interview-based article about Hubert Hermans, founder of The Dialogical Self Theory (DST), was intended to determine the founder’s personal relationship to the construction and development of his theory and to provide a portrait of the engaged scientist and vulnerable researcher at work. DST lends itself to interdisciplinary research and practice, and is used in diverse fields and contexts (e.g. psychotherapy; bereavement scholarship; higher education). However, little has been written about the founder of the theory. I embarked on this project to illuminate the researcher and theorist as an individual who taps into personal material for practical and conceptual learning, and to honour Hermans’s contribution to the field of psychology, in the spirit of a Festschrift. Reinekke Lengelle (02 Apr 2021): Portrait of a scientist: in conversation with Hubert Hermans, founder of Dialogical Self Theory1, British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, DOI: 10.1080/03069885.2021.1900779
Background: The importance of clarifying goals and providing process feedback for student learning has been widely acknowledged. From a Self-Determination Theory perspective, it is suggested that motivational and learning gains will be obtained because in well-structured learning environments, when goals and process feedback are provided, students will feel more effective (need for competence), more in charge over their own learning (need for autonomy) and experience a more positive classroom atmosphere (need for relatedness). Yet, in spite of the growing theoretical interest in goal clarification and process feedback in the context of physical education (PE), little experimental research is available about this topic. Purpose: The present study quasi-experimentally investigated whether the presence of goal clarification and process feedback positively affects students’ need satisfaction and frustration. Method: Twenty classes from five schools with 492 seventh grade PE students participated in this quasi-experimental study. Within each school, four classes were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental conditions (n = 121, n = 117, n = 126 and n = 128) in a 2 × 2 factorial design, in which goal clarification (absence vs. presence) and process feedback (absence vs. presence) were experimentally manipulated. The experimental lesson consisted of a PE lesson on handstand (a relatively new skill for seventh grade students), taught by one and the same teacher who went to the school of the students to teach the lesson. Depending on the experimental condition, the teacher either started the lesson explaining the goals, or refrained from explaining the goals. Throughout the lesson the teacher either provided process feedback, or refrained from providing process feedback. All other instructions were similar across conditions, with videos of exercises of differential levels of difficulty provided to the students. All experimental lessons were observed by a research-assistant to discern whether manipulations were provided according to a condition-specific script. One week prior to participating in the experimental lesson, data on students’ need-based experiences (i.e. quantitatively) were gathered. Directly after students’ participation in the experimental lesson, data on students’ perceptions of goal clarification and process feedback, need-based experiences (i.e. quantitatively) and experiences in general (i.e. qualitatively) were gathered. Results and discussion: The questionnaire data and observations revealed that manipulations were provided according to the lesson-scripts. Rejecting our hypothesis, quantitative analyses indicated no differences in need satisfaction across conditions, as students were equally satisfied in their need for competence, autonomy and relatedness regardless of whether the teacher provided goal clarification and process feedback, only goal clarification, only process feedback or none. Similar results were found for need frustration. Qualitative analyses indicated that, in all four conditions, aspects of the experimental lesson made students feel more effective, more in charge over their own learning and experience a more positive classroom atmosphere. Our results suggest that under certain conditions, lessons can be perceived as highly need-satisfying by students, even if the teacher does not verbally and explicitly clarify the goals and/ or provides process feedback. Perhaps, students were able to self-generate goals and feedback based on the instructional videos.
