| Course | HW315 Models for Health and Wellness |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 9 |
| Paper type | Intervention design |
| Length | About 880 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Health and Wellness |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HW315 Unit 9
Back on the Court, Not Back at the Gym: A Unit 9 Intervention Design Built on Self-Determination Theory
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
HW315: Models for Health and Wellness
Unit 9 Intervention Design
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The technician, his history and the recreation league are composite; the theory's sources and the review cited are real.
History
Marcus, a composite 38-year-old help-desk technician for a regional insurance company, sits for most of a nine-hour day. He has bought a gym membership three times in six years: once after his physician mentioned his weight and blood pressure, once on New Year's Day and once after a coworker lost weight. Each time he went three or four times a week for a few weeks, then less often, then not at all, and each membership lapsed within four months. Asked what the workouts were like, he said: "Punishment for sitting all day. I'd do the treadmill and the machines and count the minutes." In college he played pickup basketball four or five days a week and remembers it as the best part of those years.
Theory
Self-Determination Theory distinguishes types of motivation along a continuum from controlled to autonomous (Ryan & Deci, 2000). At the controlled end, external regulation means acting to meet outside demands or avoid punishment, and introjected regulation means acting to avoid guilt. At the autonomous end, identified regulation means acting because one values the outcome, and intrinsic motivation means acting because the activity itself is enjoyable. Autonomous motivation, on this account, thrives when three needs are satisfied: autonomy, meaning that a person experiences their actions as chosen; competence, which is feeling capable at what one attempts; and relatedness, which is feeling bound to other people.
Marcus's gym visits sat near the controlled end. They began with a physician's comment or a calendar date, and he described them as punishment, a phrase that suggests introjected regulation: exercise as penance for sitting. A systematic review of exercise studies found that more autonomous forms of motivation, especially intrinsic motivation, predicted long-term exercise adherence, and that controlled motives did not (Teixeira et al., 2012).
Marcus's three memberships did not fail for lack of effort; they failed because each was built on controlled motivation, and the review evidence predicts that controlled motivation fades within months.
Intervention Components
1. Autonomy: he chooses the activity. The wellness coach asks Marcus what physical activity he has ever enjoyed, without suggesting any. He names basketball. The plan does not ask him to return to a gym or to adopt a program designed by someone else, and he decides how often to play.
2. Competence: a graded return with skill goals. Marcus has not played in fifteen years. Returning to full-court games at once would risk injury and embarrassment, both of which would undermine competence. Confidence in an activity grows most reliably from experiences of success at a manageable level of challenge (Bandura, 1977). The first four weeks involve shooting alone at a park court twice a week, with goals stated as skills, such as making seven of ten free throws, rather than calories or minutes. Weeks five to eight add half-court games with a coworker. Full-court games begin when he says he is ready.
3. Relatedness: a team and a standing night. A coworker plays in a Tuesday-night recreational league at a community center and has offered him a spot on the team's roster. A standing night with people who expect him addresses relatedness directly and adds a social reason to show up that the gym never offered.
Logic Table
Each line links one component to its need, its expected effect and its measure.
1. Choosing basketball. Need: autonomy. Expected effect: motivation shifts from controlled toward intrinsic. Measure: a short self-report scale of exercise motivation at weeks zero, eight and sixteen, plus his own description of the activity.
2. Graded skill goals. Need: competence. Expected effect: steady sense of improvement, fewer early dropouts. Measure: free throw counts in a notes app and his rating of how capable he feels.
3. Tuesday league. Need: relatedness. Expected effect: attendance sustained by commitment to teammates. Measure: games attended out of games scheduled.
What the Design Avoids
The design deliberately avoids the features of his failed memberships: an activity chosen for him, goals framed as calories burned, solitary workouts and a start triggered by guilt. It also avoids rewards such as gift cards for attendance, since external rewards can undermine intrinsic motivation for an activity a person already enjoys (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Evaluation
Success at sixteen weeks would mean Marcus is playing at least twice a week, describes basketball in terms of enjoyment rather than obligation and attends at least three of four league nights. If his motivation scores remain controlled despite regular play, the coach would explore what still feels imposed.
Safety and Scope
Because Marcus has elevated blood pressure and has been inactive for years, he should check with his physician before starting full-court play. The coach's role is to support motivation and planning, not to clear him medically.
Limitations
The design rests on a single person's history and preferences. The league slot depends on a coworker's team. Self-reported motivation can be influenced by what Marcus thinks the coach wants to hear.
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Teixeira, P. J., Carraça, E. V., Markland, D., Silva, M. N., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Exercise, physical activity, and self-determination theory: A systematic review. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 9, Article 78. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-9-78
The Purdue Global HW315 Unit 9 instructions
The intervention design unit asks students to plan a change effort grounded in a behavior theory, usually for one person or a small group. Most prompts want the history or problem, the theoretical rationale, components tied to constructs, a logic table or model, an evaluation plan, and attention to safety and feasibility. Start from what has failed before, if the person has tried. Explain where the person's current motivation or behavior sits in the theory. Link every component to a construct and state the expected effect and how it will be measured. Say what the design leaves out and why. Plan evaluation at defined points. Refer medical questions to a physician. Expect five or six pages with APA citations.
Inside the HW315 Unit 9 example
The history section describes Marcus's three memberships, their triggers and his phrase for the workouts, along with his college basketball. A theory section places his motivation on the continuum and cites a review linking autonomous motivation to long-term exercise. The highlighted sentence diagnoses the past failures. Three numbered components follow, one per need, with the graded return citing self-efficacy research. A three-line logic table links each component to its need, expected effect and measure. A section lists what the design avoids, including attendance rewards, with the theory's reason for each. Evaluation at sixteen weeks, a medical check before full-court play and limitations close the design.
HW315 Unit 9 rubric: what earns full points
Intervention design rubrics in HW315 usually focus on theoretical grounding, internal logic, feasibility and evaluation. Grounding means each component is clearly tied to a construct, with the theory accurately explained. Logic is shown by a table or model connecting components, mechanisms and measures. Feasibility is judged against the person's schedule, budget and situation as described. Evaluation earns points when measures and time points are specific. Safety and scope, including medical clearance where needed, are often scored here too. Citations and professional presentation complete the rubric. Designs that list activities without linking them to the theory, or that propose measures nobody could collect, tend to lose points.
HW315 Unit 9 help from the desk
Intervention designs frequently name a theory in the introduction and then list activities that could belong to any theory. Another weakness is ignoring the person's history, so the design repeats what already failed. Logic tables often omit the measure column or fill it with vague outcomes. Some designs add rewards that the chosen theory warns against. Medical clearance for previously inactive adults is sometimes missed. Feasibility is rarely checked against the person's actual week. If your draft reads as a set of activities with no reason behind each one, describe the person's history and the theory you were assigned, and we can help you link every component to a construct.
Get an HW315 Unit 9 example written to your instructions
The person, the behavior and the theory set out for Unit 9 form the starting point, plus any earlier work on this case and the rubric. The design traces every component to a construct, sets testable objectives, measures the mechanism as well as the behavior, and states what would count against it. A first sample costs nothing and takes 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More HW315 papers and BS in Health and Wellness samples
- HW315 Unit 1: Model Test Post
- HW315 Unit 2: Model Comparison Paper
- HW315 Unit 3: Behavior Analysis
- HW315 Unit 4: Readiness Assessment
- HW315 Unit 5: Barrier Identification Exercise
- HW315 Unit 6: Seminar Reflection
- HW315 Unit 7: Motivational Strategy Plan
- HW315 Unit 8: Social Support Analysis
- HW315 Unit 10: Wellness Model Portfolio
- HW310 Unit 9: Client Recommendation Memo
- HD499 Unit 9: Capstone Presentation
- HD480 Unit 9: Media and Channel Plan
- HD460 Unit 9: Stakeholder Report
HW315 Unit 9 questions, answered
Can an intervention design focus on a single person?
Many HW315 prompts allow it, and an individual design often shows the theory-to-component link more clearly than a program for a population. The structure is the same: problem, theory, objectives, components, evaluation. Where the prompt asks for a group, the individual case can still serve as the illustrative participant the design is built around. Say which applies in the introduction.
How is a logic table different from a list of components?
A list says what will happen; a logic table says why each piece should work. Each row connects a component to the construct it targets, the change expected in that construct, and how the change will be measured. If a row cannot be completed, the component probably lacks a theoretical basis, which is exactly what the table is meant to reveal.
Does the design need to be realistic to carry out?
Yes, within reason. Graders in many sections check feasibility: whether the components fit the person's schedule, budget and circumstances as described. An elegant theoretical design built around resources the person does not have tends to lose marks. Using what already exists in the case, such as a coworker's team, is often both more feasible and more convincing.
Where can I find a free HW315 Unit 9 sample paper?
This page holds a complete Unit 9 intervention design built on Self-Determination Theory for a technician returning to basketball, with a logic table, margin notes and APA references.
Why does the design avoid rewards for attendance?
Self-Determination Theory warns that external rewards can weaken intrinsic motivation for an activity a person already enjoys, so paying him to play basketball could undercut the very motivation the design is trying to build.