The characteristics, predictors, and outcomes of (de)motivating teaching styles: A cross-cultural investigation

Grounded on the self-determination theory (SDT), the researcher conducted four studies to compare the preferred (de)motivating teaching styles in Italy and China (Studies 1 and 2) and to further investigate these teaching styles in the Chinese educational context (Studies 3 and 4). Moreover, the predictors and outcomes of these teaching styles on students were also assessed. The results of Studies 1 and 2 showed that Italian teachers self-reported adopting more motivating styles than Chinese teachers. However, compared with Italian students, Chinese students perceived more motivating styles. Moreover, self-compassion was positively related to need satisfaction which contributed to the adoption of motivating styles (i.e., autonomy-supportive and structuring), partly mediated by reappraisal, personal accomplishment, and teacher enthusiasm. On the other hand, self-derogation enhanced the need for frustration, leading to using demotivating styles (i.e., controlling and chaotic), partly mediated by suppression and emotional exhaustion. At last, instead of teacher-reported, student-perceived (de)motivating styles have significant relationships with students' need satisfaction/frustration. Specifically, students' perceived autonomy-supportive and structuring styles were positively related to their need satisfaction and perceived controlling and chaotic styles were positively associated with their need frustration. The results of Study 3 showed that perceived motivating teaching styles strengthened need satisfaction and autonomous motivation, mediating by need satisfaction. On the contrary, perceived chaotic style positively predicted need frustration and amotivation with the mediating effect of need frustration. Perceived controlling style predicted controlled motivation, while its impact on need frustration was only found in girls. The results of Study 4 revealed that need satisfaction and motivation were predictors of (de)motivating teaching styles. Also, the students, grades, subjects that teachers taught, and their competence influenced their adoption of these teaching styles. Besides, these teaching styles impacted students' need satisfaction, motivation, and engagement. Moreover, students reported that their interests, academic performance, emotions, study habits, self-control, and relationships with teachers were also affected. At last, although the controlling teaching style was demotivating, teachers and students in China were optimistic that it was effective and expected to use it to improve students' academic performance. In sum, the findings were similar in Italy and China. Teachers tended to adopt more motivating teaching styles. Besides, regardless of the culture, encouraging self-compassion, enhancing need satisfaction, reducing need frustration, preventing burnout, and developing the ability to reappraisal and enthusiasm (especially felt enthusiasm) will make teachers more supportive. Furthermore, motivating teaching styles triggered desired student outcomes (e.g., need satisfaction, autonomous motivation, and engagement), while demotivating teaching styles resulted in maladaptive student outcomes (e.g., need frustration and amotivation). These results emphasized the importance of fulfilling three basic psychological needs of teachers and students, regardless of their cultural background. Keywords: self-determination theory; (de)motivating teaching styles; need satisfaction and frustration; teacher enthusiasm; motivation; cross-cultural investigation