<%BANNER%>

The Effect of Efficacy in Instructional Strategies and Motivational Orientations on Adult Tenure in the Florida Master G...

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0041485/00001

Material Information

Title: The Effect of Efficacy in Instructional Strategies and Motivational Orientations on Adult Tenure in the Florida Master Gardener Program
Physical Description: 1 online resource (156 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Strong, Robert
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2010

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: adult, cooperative, extension, master, motivational, tailored, teaching, volunteer
Agricultural Education and Communication -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Agricultural Education and Communication thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: With increased budget cuts and a shortage of funding sources, Cooperative Extension needs a consistent corps of effective volunteers to deliver organizational objectives. Master Gardeners are very important in assisting Cooperative Extension deliver horticultural information to local citizens. Developing an understanding of volunteer motivations will assist Extension agents in identifying and retaining those adults. The theoretical framework of this study was based on self-efficacy theory and Houle s Typology. The purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of the teaching self-efficacy of Florida Master Gardeners, and adult motivations to participate in the Florida Master Gardener program. The questionnaire included the instructional efficacy construct from the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES), forty-one items from the Mergener Education Participation Scale and questions about participant demographics. The sampled population was 613 adult Master Gardeners with a total response rate of 86.79%. The majority of participants were mainly women, white, earned some type of higher education degree, and 70% of the participants were 56 years old or older. Participants felt at least some influence in their effective teaching responsibility as a volunteer educator. Participants felt a Competence related Curiosity had much influence on their participation in MG. Retaining adults as volunteer educators in the Master Gardener program extends the reach of Cooperative Extension throughout Florida s communities. Developing an understanding of adult motivational orientations will assist practitioners alter the program to best meet the needs of Master Gardener participants. Florida Master Gardener participants are primarily learning-oriented and have a moderate level of instructional efficacy. Instructional efficacy, community service, and vary routine predicts an adult s tenure in the Florida Master Gardener program. Of those independent variables only instructional efficacy can be enhanced by Master Gardener coordinators at the state and local level. This finding underpins the need for professional development in teaching strategies for Florida Master Gardeners. The higher the efficacy in instructional strategies, the longer adults will be members of the Florida Master Gardener program.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Robert Strong.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2010.
Local: Adviser: Harder, Amy Marie.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2011-04-30

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2010
System ID: UFE0041485:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0041485/00001

Material Information

Title: The Effect of Efficacy in Instructional Strategies and Motivational Orientations on Adult Tenure in the Florida Master Gardener Program
Physical Description: 1 online resource (156 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Strong, Robert
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2010

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: adult, cooperative, extension, master, motivational, tailored, teaching, volunteer
Agricultural Education and Communication -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Agricultural Education and Communication thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: With increased budget cuts and a shortage of funding sources, Cooperative Extension needs a consistent corps of effective volunteers to deliver organizational objectives. Master Gardeners are very important in assisting Cooperative Extension deliver horticultural information to local citizens. Developing an understanding of volunteer motivations will assist Extension agents in identifying and retaining those adults. The theoretical framework of this study was based on self-efficacy theory and Houle s Typology. The purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of the teaching self-efficacy of Florida Master Gardeners, and adult motivations to participate in the Florida Master Gardener program. The questionnaire included the instructional efficacy construct from the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES), forty-one items from the Mergener Education Participation Scale and questions about participant demographics. The sampled population was 613 adult Master Gardeners with a total response rate of 86.79%. The majority of participants were mainly women, white, earned some type of higher education degree, and 70% of the participants were 56 years old or older. Participants felt at least some influence in their effective teaching responsibility as a volunteer educator. Participants felt a Competence related Curiosity had much influence on their participation in MG. Retaining adults as volunteer educators in the Master Gardener program extends the reach of Cooperative Extension throughout Florida s communities. Developing an understanding of adult motivational orientations will assist practitioners alter the program to best meet the needs of Master Gardener participants. Florida Master Gardener participants are primarily learning-oriented and have a moderate level of instructional efficacy. Instructional efficacy, community service, and vary routine predicts an adult s tenure in the Florida Master Gardener program. Of those independent variables only instructional efficacy can be enhanced by Master Gardener coordinators at the state and local level. This finding underpins the need for professional development in teaching strategies for Florida Master Gardeners. The higher the efficacy in instructional strategies, the longer adults will be members of the Florida Master Gardener program.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Robert Strong.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2010.
Local: Adviser: Harder, Amy Marie.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2011-04-30

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2010
System ID: UFE0041485:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 THE EFFECT OF EFFICACY IN INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES AND MOTIVATIONAL ORIENTATIONS ON ADULT TENURE IN THE FLORIDA MASTER GARDENER PROGRAM By ROBERT L. STRONG JR. A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2010

PAGE 2

2 2010 Robert L. Strong Jr.

PAGE 3

3 To my m om who never had t he opportunity to go to college I hope this serves as an example of what you did accomplish.

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank my parents, Robert and Connie Strong, for being supportive, loving, and reminding me where I came from by demonstrating the most important things in life. I thank my dad for attending Tita ns football games with me when I was home on breaks. Also, I thank my mom for small words of encouragement feeding me home cooked meals, and helping me to relax when I came home. I thank my chair, Dr. Amy Harder. Dr. Harder mentored, led motivated, and enhanced my sc holarship to always ensure my research and teaching were beyond reproach. She has been instrumental to me and any success I have had as a researcher and teacher in the Department of Agricultural Education at the University of Florida. I hop e to continue to work with Dr. Harder as a colleague as I have been extremely blessed to have someone as talented as an advisor. Her name has been added to the short list of folks who I consider mentors. She will always be very important to me. I thank fe llow graduate students for their support, motivation, and commitment to excellence ; Andrew Thoron and Lauri Baker Their encouragement and commitment to excellence was a model and spurred me on to realize no fences exist in academia. I hope to continue wor king with th em as colleagues in the future as I have be en lucky to get to know such wonderful people as these three. I thank membe rs of my dissertation committee: Dr. Nick Place, Dean of Extensio n at the University of Maryland; Dr. Hannah Carter in the De partment of Agricultural Education and Communicati on at the University of Florida; and Dr. Kate Fogarty from the Department of Family Youth and Community Sciences at the University of Florida. The time and commitment these three provided my research will always be appreciated. Based upon their efforts with me, I look forward to serving on doctoral committees one day.

PAGE 5

5 I thank Dr. Ed Osborne and all members of the Department of Agricultural Education and Communication team. The department will always be spe cial to me regardless of my professional address. The culture of AEC taught me to strive for the best, hard work pays off, and to always shoot for the moon because even if I miss I will always be among the stars. I thank Rolfs Hall Lake Alice and the So uthwest Recreation Cen ter for serving as special places for me as well. I will miss their character and role as epicenters of hard work that produced results in my professional and personal life. I thank all undergraduate and graduate students at UF. All h ave continually reminded me how much I love teaching. Lastly, I thank GATOR athletics for a great release from school work and most importantly awesome experiences for an avid sports fan.

PAGE 6

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOW LEDGMENTS .................................................................................................................... 4 LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................................. 10 LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................ 12 LIST OF ABBREVIA TIONS ............................................................................................................ 13 ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................................ 14 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 16 History of Cooper ative Extension .............................................................................................. 16 Master Gardener .......................................................................................................................... 18 Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................................ 20 Purpose and Objectives of the Study ......................................................................................... 21 Theoretical Framework ............................................................................................................... 22 Significance of the Study ............................................................................................................ 23 Definition of Terms ..................................................................................................................... 26 Limitations and Assumptions of the Study................................................................................ 27 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE .................................................................................................... 28 Overview of Theoretical Framework ......................................................................................... 28 Houles Typology ........................................................................................................................ 29 Motivationa l Orientations ........................................................................................................... 32 Cognitive Interest ................................................................................................................. 32 Interpersonal Relations ........................................................................................................ 34 Professional Advancement .................................................................................................. 35 Escape from Routine and Compliance with External Influence ....................................... 35 Cognitive Interest and Professional Advancement ............................................................ 36 Master Gardener Demographic Characteristics ........................................................................ 37 Participation in Extension Programs .......................................................................................... 37 Self Efficacy Theory ................................................................................................................... 38 Cognitive Processes ............................................................................................................. 40 Motivational Processes ........................................................................................................ 41 Affective Processes .............................................................................................................. 43 Selection Processes .............................................................................................................. 44

PAGE 7

7 Supporting Literature .................................................................................................................. 45 Agricultural Teacher Education .......................................................................................... 45 Volunteers ............................................................................................................................ 45 Cooperative Extension ........................................................................................................ 46 Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 47 3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS ................................................................................. 49 Research Design .......................................................................................................................... 49 Objectives of the Study ............................................................................................................... 50 Population .................................................................................................................................... 51 Sampling Method ........................................................................................................................ 52 Instrumentation ............................................................................................................................ 54 Mergeners Education Participation Scale ......................................................................... 54 Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale ......................................................................................... 56 Data Collection ............................................................................................................................ 58 Survey Design ...................................................................................................................... 58 Response Rate ...................................................................................................................... 60 Nonresponse ......................................................................................................................... 60 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 61 Reliability by Instrument Construct ........................................................................................... 65 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................................ 67 Objective 1: Findings .................................................................................................................. 67 Objective 2: Findings .................................................................................................................. 69 Objective 3: Findings .................................................................................................................. 69 Competence related Curiosity ............................................................................................. 70 Community Service ............................................................................................................. 71 Interpersonal Relations ........................................................................................................ 71 Escape from Routine ........................................................................................................... 72 External Influence ................................................................................................................ 73 Professional Advancement .................................................................................................. 73 Objective Four: Findings ............................................................................................................ 74 Objective Five ............................................................................................................................. 76 Gender .................................................................................................................................. 76 Age ........................................................................................................................................ 77 Education .............................................................................................................................. 79 Income .................................................................................................................................. 81 Race ...................................................................................................................................... 82 Master G ardener Tenure...................................................................................................... 83 Length of Residence ............................................................................................................ 84 Florida Native or Not ........................................................................................................... 85 Objective Six ............................................................................................................................... 85 Objective Seven: Findings .......................................................................................................... 86 Objective Eight: Findings ........................................................................................................... 88

PAGE 8

8 5 CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................... 91 Summary of the Study ................................................................................................................ 91 Summary of Purpose and Objectives ......................................................................................... 92 Summary of Methodology .......................................................................................................... 93 Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations .................................................................. 94 Objective One: Conclusions ................................................................................................ 94 Objective One: Implications ............................................................................................... 95 Objective One: Recommendations for Research ............................................................... 96 Objective One: Recommendations for Practice ................................................................. 97 Objective Two: Conclusions ............................................................................................... 98 Objective Two: Implications ............................................................................................... 98 Objective Two: Recommendations for Research ............................................................ 100 Objective Two: Recommendations for Practice .............................................................. 101 Objective Three: Conclusions ........................................................................................... 104 Objective Three: Implications ........................................................................................... 106 Objective Three: Recommendations for Research .......................................................... 107 Objective Three: Recommendations for Practice ............................................................ 108 Objective Four: Conclusio ns ............................................................................................. 108 Objective Four: Implications ............................................................................................ 109 Objective Four: Recommendations for Research ............................................................ 110 Objective Four: Recommendations for Practice .............................................................. 110 Objective Five: Conclusions ............................................................................................. 111 Objective Five: Implications ............................................................................................. 112 Objective Five: Recommendations for Research ............................................................. 113 Objective Five: Recommendations for Practice .............................................................. 113 Objective Six: Conclusions ............................................................................................... 114 Objective Six: Implications ............................................................................................... 114 Objective Six: Recom mendations for Research .............................................................. 115 Objective Six: Recommendations for Practice ................................................................ 116 Objective Seven: Conclusions .......................................................................................... 117 Objective Seven: Implications .......................................................................................... 117 Objective Seven: Recommendations for Research .......................................................... 118 Objective Seven: Recommendations for Practice............................................................ 118 Objective Eight: Conclusions ............................................................................................ 120 Objective Eight: Implications ........................................................................................... 121 Objective Eight: Recommendations for Research ........................................................... 123 Objective Eight: Recommendations for Practice ............................................................. 123 APPENDI X A PERMISSION FORMS ............................................................................................................ 129 B SURVEY INSTRUMENTS ..................................................................................................... 132 C LETTERS TO PARTICIPANTS ............................................................................................. 138

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 142 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ........................................................................................................... 156

PAGE 10

10 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3 1 Reliability Coefficients for each construct of the Mergener Education Participation Scale ........................................................................................................................................ 55 3 2 Reliability Levels of Internal Scales ..................................................................................... 65 4 1 Participant Demographics ...................................................................................................... 68 4 3 Overall Means for Each Construct ........................................................................................ 70 4 4 Descriptive Statistics for the Competence related Curiosity Construct .............................. 70 4 5 Descriptive Statistics for the Community Service Construct .............................................. 71 4 6 Descriptive Statistics for the Interpersonal Relations Construct ......................................... 72 4 7 Descriptive Statistics for the Escape from Routine Construct ............................................ 72 4 8 Descriptive Statistics for the External Influence Construct ................................................. 73 4 9 Descriptive Statistics for the Professional Advancement Construct ................................... 74 4 10 Independent Samples t test for Gender and Instructional Efficacy .................................... 74 4 11 Analysis of Variance for Age and Instructional Efficacy .................................................... 74 4 12 Analysis of Variance for Education and Instructional Efficacy .......................................... 75 4 13 Analysis of Variance for Income and Instructional Efficacy .............................................. 75 4 14 Independent Samples t test for Race and Instructional Efficacy ........................................ 75 4 15 Analysis of Variance for Master Gardener Tenure and Instruction al Efficacy .................. 75 4 16 Analysis of Variance for Length of Florida Residence and Instructional Efficacy ........... 76 4 17 Independent Samples t test for Born in Florida and Instructional Efficacy ....................... 76 4 18 Independent Samples t test for Gender and Motivational Orientations ............................. 77 4 19 Analysis of Variance for Age and Motivational Orientations ............................................. 79 4 20 Analysis of Variance for Education and Motivational Orientations ................................... 80 4 21 Analysis of Variance for Income and Motivational Orientations ....................................... 81 4 22 Independent Samples t test for Race and Motivational Orientations ................................. 82

PAGE 11

11 4 23 Analysis of Variance for Master Gardener Tenure and Motivational Orientations ........... 83 4 24 Analysis of Variance for Length of Florida Residence and Motivationa l Orientations .... 84 4 25 Independent Samples t test for Place of Birth and Motivational Orientations ................... 85 4 26 Correlations between Motivational Orientations and Instructional Efficacy ..................... 86 4 27 Partition of Variance among Factors in Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scale ........................................................................................................................................ 87 4 28 Summary of Poisson Regression Analysis of Master Gardener Tenure on Demographic Characteristics, Motivational Orientations and Instructional Efficacy ....... 89

PAGE 12

12 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2 1 Conceptual Framework Highlighting the Foundations of the Study .................................. 48 5 1 Houle and M EPS Constructs Realigned Resulting from Principal Component Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 119 5 2 Altered Conceptual Framework Based upon the Studys Findings .................................. 125

PAGE 13

13 LIST OF ABBREVIATION S M EPS Mergeners (1979) Education P articipation Scale TSES Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale UFMGP University of Florida Master Gardener Program

PAGE 14

14 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirem ents for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy THE EFFECT OF EFFICACY IN INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES AND MOTIVATIONAL ORIENTATIONS ON ADULT TENURE IN THE FLORIDA MASTER GARDENER PROGRAM By Robert L. Strong Jr. May 2010 Chair: Amy Harder Major: Agricultural Education and Communication With increased budget cuts and a shortage of funding sources, Cooperative Extension needs a consistent corps of effective volunteers to deliver organizational objectives. Master Gardeners are very important in assisting Cooper ative Extension deliver horticultural information to local citizens. Developing an understanding of volunteer motivations will assist Extension agents in identifying and retaining those adults. The theoretical framework of this study was based on self -effi cacy theory and Houles Typology. The purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of the teaching self -efficacy of Florida Master Gardeners, and adult motivations to participate in the Florida Master Gardener program. The questionnaire included the instructional efficacy construct from the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES), forty -one items from the Mergener Education Participation Scale and questions about participant demographics. The sampled population was 613 adult Master Gardeners with a total response rate of 86.79%. The majority of participants were mainly women, white, earned some type of higher education degree, and 70% of the participants were 56 years old or older.

PAGE 15

15 Participants felt at least some influence in their effective teac hing responsibility as a volunteer educator. Participants felt a Competence related Curiosity had much influence on their participation in MG. Retaining adults as volunteer educators in the Master Gardener program extends the reach of Cooperative Extensi on throughout Floridas communities. Developing an understanding of adult motivational orientations will assist practitioners alter the program to best meet the needs of Master Gardener participants. Florida Master Gardener participants are primarily learn ing -oriented and have a moderate level of instructional efficacy. Instructional efficacy, community service, and vary routine predicts an adults tenure in the Florida Master Gardener program. Of those independent variables only instructional efficacy can be enhanced by Master Gardener coordinators at the state and local level. This finding underpins the need for professional development in teaching strategies for Florida Master Gardeners. The higher the efficacy in instructional strategies, the longer adul ts will be members of the Florida Master Gardener program. Due to the importance of MG participation to the University of Florida and horticultures impact to the state of Florida, MG coordinators should work with segments of the horticultural industry to enhance instructional efficacy in MG participants.

PAGE 16

16 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION History of Cooperative Extension One of the darkest times in American history birthed a higher education achievement. As the Civil War was raging, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Morrill Act into law in 1862. This federal legislation established land -grant universities in the United States to educate individuals in agriculture, home economics, and mechanical arts (Rasmussen, 1989). As part of the Act, each state received 30,0 00 acres, per Senator, from the government to sell with the income going toward the creation of these universities. The Morrill Act of 1862 brought a practical form of education to a large portion of the U.S. population (NASULGC, 2008). The second Morril l Act of 1890 created land grant universities for minority students mainly in states that were a part of the Confederacy. The Morrill Act of 1994 created land grant colleges for Native Americans, and these institutions are mainly in the mid to western Unit ed States. A total of 106 land grant institutions exist today, and there is at least one in each state and U.S. territory (NASULGC, 2008). The Hatch Act was signed into law in 1887. This piece of federal legislation provided funding for agricultural exper iment stations for the land -grant universities created by the Morrill Act of 1862. These experiment stations were designed to provide the latest information from agricultural research and became another component to the land grant university. The United S tates Congress created Cooperative Extension in 1914, through the SmithLever Act, to tackle primarily rural concerns and subject matter in agriculture. The main objectives of the Smith -Lever Act were for Cooperative Extension to institute practical applic ations of research, as well as provide education and practical demonstrations of enhanced practices in agriculture (Seevers, Graham, & Conklin, 2007). Cooperative Extension would

PAGE 17

17 provide the public the information produced from the agricultural experiment stations, as well as bring the land grant universities to the local community. The Smith Lever Act authorized the United States Department of Agriculture to supply each state with funding constructed from a formula based on each states population. Cooper ative Extension became the third component (teaching, research, & extension) of the land grant institutions created from the Morrill Act (NASULGC, 2008). The system involves an alliance among federal, state, and local governments to make scientific knowled ge and the practical application of that knowledge available to communities. All levels of government working together is the meaning of the word cooperative. Cooperative Extension refers to cooperation in levels for government funding, and cooperation f or program development. Cooperative Extension was formed to respond to farm, rural, suburban and urban concerns within communities (Seevers et al., 2007). Cooperative Extensions objectives are to design, implement, and evaluate educational experiences to assist groups or individuals by increasing their knowledge and skills in solving problems (Seevers et al.). The educational program is the hallmark of Cooperative Extension. Improving the success of educational programs has been and continues to be a prior ity both internally and externally for Extension (ECOP LAC, 2007). Lopez et al. (1999) suggested the development of Extension programs is influenced by societal needs or trends. Educational programs dictate each decision the organization makes (ECOP LAC, 2 006). Most Extension programs are first identified as a need on the local level and are carried out by the organization to meet the needs of citizens (Rasmussen, 1989). Extensions educational programs are available to anyone who wishes to participate. Var ious programming components are unique to Cooperative Extension. 4 H Youth Development, Master Gardener, Integrated Pest Management, Money Matters, and Master

PAGE 18

18 Naturalist are some of the many programs offered by Cooperative Extension. Program areas are Agri culture, Family and Community Science, 4 H/Youth Development, and Community Resource Development (UF IFAS/Extension, 2008). Master Gardener Agriculture is second only to tourism as the largest industry in the state of Florida (Florida Department of Agricu lture and Consumer Services, 2007). Horticulture is the leading agricultural industry in Florida with a total annual economic impact of $909,212,711 in sales (USDA National Agricultural Statistical Service, 2007). Florida Cooperative Extension is responsib le for delivering adult educational programs in the state of Florida (UF IFAS/Extension, 2008). Florida Cooperative Extension initiated the Master Gardener program in 1979 as a result of the importance of the states horticulture industry and homeowners desire for gardening information (T. MacCubbin, personal communication, July 10, 2008). The primary objective of the Florida Master Gardener Program is to broaden the outreach of the University of Florida/Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFA S) as a component of the land grant system (University of Florida Master Gardener Program [UFMGP], 2008). Master Gardeners contribute to a variety of distinctive extension and educational activities. The Florida Master Gardener Program is for adults that a re both fond of gardening and will enjoy instructing the public about gardening (T. Wichman, personal communication, June 2, 2008). Master Gardener is the prototype for designing and implementing an educational program targeted to education and community s ervice (Savanick & Boyd, 2005). Master Gardeners assist the local Extension agent with questions from homeowners, and educate clientele through the use of demonstration gardens (Reiners et al., 1991). With horticulture subject matter, Extension horticultu re agents identify, recruit, educate, and evaluate adult volunteers from the community.

PAGE 19

19 Once certified to be Master Gardeners, adult volunteers share horticultural information they are educated on with public audiences in their local communities (UFMGP, 20 08). Extension offices receive numerous questions from homeowners on subject matter that relates to gardening. Extension agents have a difficult time in managing and answering all of these questions from their constituents. The Master Gardener Program is a unique volunteer training program in that adults submit an application, are required to pay for the course, and then are required to donate a minimum of 75 volunteer hours annually. Master Gardeners provide people, time, and organizational expertise for l ocal program coordinators (Meyer, 1997). The 2007 Florida Master Gardener report indicated that more than 3,835 volunteers contributed 425,445 hours to local county horticulture extension educational programs, providing services to citizens of Florida wort h $7.9 million (UFMGP, 2008) As part of the process of becoming a Master Gardener, potential volunteers must purchase the curriculum and materials at a maximum cost of $100 to participate in the training course (UFMGP, 2008). Master Gardeners fulfill appr oximately fifty hours of UF/IFAS sponsored training for certification. Master Gardeners meet their volunteer requirements in a number of ways: teaching educational programs, conducting evaluations of soil examples answering horticulture questions (face to -face, telephone, publications) assisting with local garden projects assisting with 4 -H activities and assisting with the Florida Yards & Neighborhoods Program (UFMGP, 2008). Of the 67 counties in Florida, 58 have an active Master Gardener Program as a pproved by the County Extension Director (UFMGP, 2008) More than 80% of those 58 counties educate a class of adults every year (T. Wichman, personal communication, June 2, 2008). The Extension professional responsible for the local Master Gardener Program is the coordinator (often an

PAGE 20

20 Extension agent but not always) assigned to the program ( T. Wichman, personal communication, June 2, 2008) The Master Gardener coordinator is the Extension agent or program assistant assigned to the program in each county. This individual identifies volunteers, educates them, and administers the program (UFMGP, 2008). Florida Cooperative Extension has a Master Gardener program with an organizational structure including a state Extension horticulture specialist, a state Master Gardener coordinator that provides guidance and standardized curriculum to agents in counties with Master Gardener programs, and local Extension agents as program coordinators (Dorn & Relf, 2000). Statement of the Problem According to Schrock et al. (1999), demographic characteristics alone cannot be used to predict prolonged participation in the Master Gardener program. More rigorous research is needed to learn why adults continuously participate in Master Gardener. Developing a comprehension of character istics Master Gardener participants on a state by state basis is needed due to the lack of a standard national Master Gardener program (Kirsch & VanDerZanden, 2002). Extension should utilize trained Master Gardeners in as many volunteer opportunities as po ssible for several years in order to get a good return on their investment (Meyer & Hanchek, 1997; Swackhamer & Kiernan, 2005). National statistics have revealed that on the average, one out of three volunteers in any given organization discontinue volunte ering after one year of service (Corporation for National and Community Service, 2006). Schrock et al. (2000) recommended keeping quality Master Gardeners to decrease the cost of the program and increase the effectiveness of Extension in terms of delivery of services. An essential component to any volunteer organization or educational program that relies on volunteers is retention. Volunteers are individuals searching for information while cooperating with individuals or organizations with mutual interests (Rost, 1997). A straightforward

PAGE 21

21 explanation does not exist as to what motivates adults to volunteer for the Master Gardener program (Flagler, 1992). With a total value of Florida Master Gardener volunteer hours in 2007 worth approximately $8,000,000, it is crucial that UF IFAS/Extension personnel as well as the horticulture industry understand why Master Gardener participants are electing to become active or inactive in the program (L. Arrington, personal communication, June 1, 2008). Many Florida communit ies rely upon Master Gardeners to assist them with projects, as well for educational horticulture advice, and therefore would benefit from an increase in the retention rate among this generous group of individuals (T. Wichman, personal communication, June 2, 2008). Purpose and Objectives of the Study The purpose of this study was to understand adult volunteer characteristics, efficacy in instructional strategies and motivational orientations on Florida Master Gardener tenure. The primary objectives of the study we re 1 To describe participant demographics in the Florida Master Gardener program. 2 To describe Master Gardeners efficacy in instructional strategies as volunteer educators; specifically: (a) ability to respond to difficult questions, (b) ability to gauge client comprehension of the information taught, (c) ability to craft good questions for clients, (d) ability to adjust information to the proper level for individual clients, (e) comfort with using evaluation strategies, (f) ability to provide an al ternative explanation when clients are confused, and (g) the ability to implement alternative teaching strategies in their instruction. 3 To describe the motivational orientations of adults participating in Master Gardener; specifically: (a) Competence rel ated curiosity, (b) Interpersonal relations, (c) Community service, (d) Professional advancement, (e) Compliance with external influences, and (f) Escape from routine. 4 To determine if significant differences exist between efficacy in instructional strate gies based on participant demographics. 5 To determine if significant differences exist between motivational orientations based on participant demographics. 6 To describe any existing relationships between efficacy in instructional strategies and motivational orientations for adults participating in Master Gardener.

PAGE 22

22 7 To test the unidimensionality of Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scale. 8 To understand the effects of motivational orientations and efficacy in instructional strategies on Master Garde ner tenure. Theoretical Framework The theoretical framework of this study included Houles (1961) Typology and self efficacy theory (Bandura, 1993). The overlapping frameworks were implemented to address the research objectives. The Mergener Education Par ticipation Scale (Mergener, 1979) and the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (Tschannen -Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001) were utilized to measure the research objectives associated with motivational orientations and instructional efficacy on participation. Houle (1961) outlined three separate classifications that described adults motivations to participate in continued learning, and are based upon adults purposes and values of education. The three taxonomies were goal oriented, activity -oriented and learning ori ented (Houle). Goal oriented adults initial thoughts before participating in an educational program are the realization of their need for the education or a personal interest they want to comprehend to a higher degree. An activity -oriented adult chooses t he educational program based upon the amount of relations that they will receive with other adults. Learning oriented adults perceive continued learning as a duty, and education will enhance their lives. Self -efficacy theory is the extent to which indivi duals beliefs regarding their aptitude to stimulate their authority over their own stratum of performance and over incidents that influence their lives (Bandura, 1993). The affect of self -efficacy contributes to an adults motivation to participate in an activity. Self -efficacy will impact how adults cogitate, form opinions, inspire themselves, and act (Bandura, 1997). Tschannen -Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) suggested

PAGE 23

23 educator self -efficacy describes an instructors confidence to bring about learner engage ment and learning outcomes including challenging learners. Houles (1961) Typology and Banduras (1993) Self efficacy theory were required to give an explanation of why adults participate beyond their first year of contribution in the Master Gardener progr am. Houles Typology (1961) regarding the three learning orientations and Banduras (1993) self -efficacy theory provided the foundation for this study. Motivational orientations and instructional efficacy were utilized to comprehend volunteer retention in the Florida Master Gardener program. Significance of the Study The study was significant for a variety of reasons. Master Gardeners volunteer time and expertise are an asset to UF/IFAS Extension, the organization losses a large number of participants annu ally and participants serve as ambassadors for Cooperative Extension in local communities across the state. The more MG participants can lead to more organizational advocacy for Cooperative Extension. Master Gardeners have proven to be a true asset to UF IFAS/Extension programming and outreach efforts across the state (J. Dusky, personal communication, August, 21, 2008). Yet, a discrepancy exists between the number of participants who complete the Master Gardener training program and the number of Master G ardeners who remain active as volunteer educators in their respective county Extension programs. The Florida Master Gardener program had a few hundred adults leave the Master Gardener program after their first year (E. Eubanks, personal communication, July 8, 2009). Master Gardeners can become strong advocates for Extension based upon their enhanced horticultural educational knowledge and community development skill set (Relf & McDaniel, 1994). Current adult educators vocation is dependent on attracting participants (Boshier & Collins, 1985). The factors that lead an adult to participate in education should initiate a research

PAGE 24

24 project centered on adult education (Boshier, 1971). Ahl (2005) recommended adults' motivation to participate in continued educati on is a pressing concern, because continued education is the solution to todays issues. Morstain and Smart (1974) recommended researchers should gain more comprehension of the characteristics and beliefs of learners in order to enhance program development in adult education. Comprehending adult motivations for participation in an educational program have been difficult due to the lack of a model and suitable instrument to warrant a scholarly hypothesis (Boshier, 1977). Barbuto, Jr., Trout, and Brown (2004) recommended sources of motivation be identified to assist agricultural educators in developing and implementing effective educational programs. Characteristics that lead adults to educational programs are an increasing research arena (Boshier & Collins). The National Research Agenda for agricultural education recommended that research is needed to identify what motivates stakeholders to participate in agricultural education programs (Osborne, n.d., p. 14). A need exists for volunteers throughout Cooperat ive Extension. Hoover and Connor (2001) indicated volunteers are significant components of each Extension program area in Florida. Master Gardener volunteers stretch the reach of Cooperative Extension (Swackhamer & Kiernan, 2005). As Extension programs at land grant institutions throughout the nation have continued to face budget deficits and decreased funding, the role of the Extension volunteer has become increasingly more significant for the organization to provide reliable services to the general public (Steele, 1994). Phillips and Bradshaw (1999) reported Master Gardener volunteers are relied on by Florida Cooperative Extension. A continuous stream of volunteers is essential to the operation of Extension objectives (Smith, 2005). Stouse and Marr (1992) suggested Master Gardener volunteers serve as walking advertisements for the program.

PAGE 25

25 Training volunteers accurately, and providing the right type of experiences for volunteers, may allow adults to feel motivated to carry on with their volunteer service (C orporation for National and Community Service, 2006). An Extension agent must have an understanding of what appeals to and motivates volunteers in order to effectively recruit, train, and retain these volunteers (Boyd, 2004). Master Gardener coordinators s hould equip volunteers the capacity to assist clientele in their communities (Peronto & Murphy, 2009). Boyd recommended in order to better recruit, prepare, and retain these adults, staff members and administrative personnel must be aware of the factors th at contribute to successful volunteer commitment and adapt their management strategies to align with these factors. Finally, Cooperative Extension is employing volunteers to embody the university and assist the public through education (Bobbitt, 1997). An adult who is secure and self -confident with the volunteer responsibility is more likely to remain involved in Master Gardener (Swackhamer & Kiernan, 2005). This study should uncover the motivational orientations that influence adult participation in Flori da Cooperative Extensions Master Gardener program. At a rate of $17.55/hour of volunteer time donated 75 minimum annual volunteer hours required 1200 participants, UF IFAS/Extension has lost a potential of $1, 579, 500 of volunteer time, over the past five years, due to the loss of continued volunteer educators in Master Gardener. This study may assist Cooperative Extension by providing state and local coordinators methods to retain adults as volunteer educators in MG in order for the organization and local programs to receive maximum benefit from this resource. This study may find alternative methods to prepare Master Gardeners as volunteer educators in order to retain adult participants. Also, this study may discover the level of instructional effica cy Master Gardeners have as volunteer educators. The state specialist, state

PAGE 26

26 coordinator, and local coordinators could use the findings to improve program participants instructional efficacy, and potentially retain more adults as volunteer educators to as sist Florida Cooperative Extension in fulfilling its mission as the educational outreach component of the land -grant university. Definition of Terms EXTENSION AGENT. An individual in a specific county or region who instructs adults in assigned subject mat ter areas (referred to as Extension educator and/or Extension faculty in some states). COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE An organization that is research based and charged with the mission of taking knowledge and skills from the land grant institutions in an array forms to the public (Rasmussen, 1989). ECOP The Extension Committee on Organizational Policy formed by the Association of Public and Land Grant Universities. INSTRUCTIONAL E FFICACY An e ducators perceived effectiveness in teaching is instructi onal efficacy (Bandura, 1997). EXTENSION PROGRAM A n educational program is a planned series of demonstrations, lectures, events, etc. by the Extension agent to accomplish educational objectives from the organization (UF IFAS/Extension, 2008). LAND GRA NT INSTITUTION A land grant institution is a higher education institution created through the Morrill Acts of 1862, 1890 or 1994. They are charged with providing practical education to a large segment of the population. MASTER GARDENER COORDINATOR. The Master Gardener coordinator is the local Extension agent or program assistant responsible for the Master Gardener program. MOTIVATIONAL ORIENTATIONS Motivational orientations are p aradigms associated with the intentions of adults for participating in e ducational programs (Houle, 1961). UF/IFAS EXTENSION. The University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences Extension. The University of Florida became a land grant institution from the 1862 Morrill Act, and Florida A&M became a land grant institution from the 1890 Morrill Act. VOLUNTEER EDUCATOR Volunteer educators are i ndividuals who provide their time, expertise, and skills in order to instruct the public about specific subject matter (Corporation for National and Community Service, 2006).

PAGE 27

27 Limitations and Assumptions of the Study The study was limited to Master Gardener adult participants in Florida. The population was restricted to Florida and may not be characteristic of other adult Master Gardeners or Master Gardener programs in other states. Also, the findings cannot be generalized to other adult education programs or adult associations. Chapter Summary Cooperative Extension is an organization that is devoted to diverse adult educational programs. This chapter explained the back ground and the need for an in -depth study on adult motivations and instructional efficacy to participate in the Extension Master Gardener program. Chapter 1 included the history of Cooperative Extension, background information on Master Gardener, the state ment of the problem, the purpose and objectives of the study, a brief summary of the theoretical framework, the significance of the study, definitions of key terms, and the studys limitations. The theoretical framework of the study included Houles (1961) Typology, and Banduras (1993) self -efficacy theory. Chapter 2 will provide literature associated with Houles Typology and Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scale. Literature associated to Banduras (1993) self -efficacy theory and Tschannen Moran and Woolfolk Hoys (2001) Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale will be examined in Chapter 2 as well. The literature review will focus on different Master Gardener programs throughout the nation and explore adult motivations for joining, and remaining active i n Master Gardener.

PAGE 28

28 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE Overview of Theoretical Framework This chapter reviewed the relevant literature that provided the background for this research. The theoretical framework for this study was Houles (1961) Typology and Band uras (1997) Self Efficacy as they relate to the pursuit of adult education and perceived self -efficacy. Both theories are used to explain why adults participate beyond their first year involvement in the Extension Master Gardener program. Master Gardener s demonstrate convictions in volunteerism, and use their knowledge to assist clientele (Peronto & Murphy, 2009). Adults are primarily motivated to participate in the first year to acquire knowledge (Finch, 1997; Moravec, 2006; Schott, 2001; Schrock et al., 2000; Schrock, 1999; Simonson & Pals, 1990; Wolford, Cox, & Culp III, 2001). The second year and beyond adults are primarily teachers of the program to citizens across their respective county (Rohs & Westerfield, 1996). Houles research was presented fir st. The Mergener Education Participation Scale (1979) will be presented as it was constructed from Houles (1961) Typology, and Boshiers (1971) Education Participation Scale. The Mergener Education Participation Scale was incorporated to assist the resear cher in determining characteristics that navigate adults to Master Gardener. Literature relating to Houles Typology and variables associated with the Mergener Education Participation Scale was included. Bandura (1997) defined self -efficacy and detailed i ts impact on individuals motivation to participate in an activity. Bandura described four methods to develop self -efficacy in adults. The researcher employed the Teachers Sense of Efficacy Scale developed by Tschannen -Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) in ord er to examine Master Gardeners self -efficacy of teaching strategies toward clients. Research related to Self -Efficacy Theory and the Teachers Sense of Efficacy

PAGE 29

29 Scale were incorporated. The studys conceptual framework is presented at the end of this cha pter. Houles Typology Houle (1961) researched adult characteristics that motivated their participation in continuing adult learning. Common characteristics of adults that were universal to specific groups were found. Adults with higher incomes are more a pt to participate than low income adults in continued learning. Individuals with religious backgrounds are more involved in educational programs than atheistic adults. Older adults are more apt to participate in continued learning than younger adults. Indi viduals who are married participate in education more than adults who are single. Adults with children are more apt to participate in programs versus those married adults who do not have children. The more formal education an adult has received the more pr obable it is that individual will participate in continued learning. Houle found previous formal education reinforces income, age, religious characteristics, married, and having children as attributes of adults that participate in continued learning opport unities. Rogers (2003) research on early adopters confirms Houles findings due to the fact they have received more formal education and are more apt to be accepting of educational opportunities. Researchers should understand the features, beliefs, and a ccomplishments of adults who participate in continuing education in order to understand the phenomena (Houle, 1961). Houle outlined three separate classifications that describe motivations of adults to participate in continued learning and are based upon a dults purposes and values of education. The three taxonomies are goal -oriented, activity -oriented and learning oriented. The first classification is the goal -oriented group. Houle (1961) identified adults in this category are motivated to participate in education to address objectives they desire to accomplish. The initial thought an adult undergoes before participating in an educational

PAGE 30

30 program is the realization of the need for the education or an identified personal interest to develop to a higher degr ee. The adults objective always instigates the educational endeavor and courses are chosen on the basis of accomplishing an objective (Houle). The goal -oriented adults did not commence their continued learning until at minimum their mid -twenties. Previous ly, they expressed minor regard for education. However, an episode occurred for each one in this classification. Those episodes range from trivial to significant depending upon the adults specific experience. An episode could range from an adults perceived need to better the community to learning the complexities of a new health care plan for their family. The second classification was the activity -oriented group. Social contact is the primary attribute that motivates activity oriented adults to participate in education (Houle, 1961). Adults in this typology chose the educational program based upon the amount of relations that they will have with other adults. However, other activity-oriented adults participate in education to escape their current situation (Houle). Activity -oriented adults initiate a continuous pursuit of learning when a dilemma necessitates a solution. Individuals self reflect before they decide to partake in continued learning (Houle). Adults that are activity -oriented have a need for s elf reflection due to the fact individual needs are usually basic or too broad. Houle (1961) described activity-oriented adults as motivated to participate in continuing education for motives dissimilar to the objectives or subject matter of the program. O rganizations providing educational programs offer opportunities for adults to meet new people. Houle suggested some adults are motivated to participate in continuing education to avoid a personal situation, to seek a new relationship, or leave a relationsh ip where they are discontented. Others enroll in education to accrue certificates or credits. Finishing the endeavor is significant to those

PAGE 31

31 adults. Some adults participate in education due to the tradition in their family or their background leads them to continuing education. The third and final classification was the learning -oriented. Houle (1961) identified education is a constant pursuit for adults in this grouping. Learning-oriented adults are devoted readers and formulate life decisions due to the likelihood of enhanced personal growth. Learning -oriented adults tend to perceive continued learning as a duty and believe that pursing education will enhance their lives. Being learning oriented comes naturally to some adults and certain individuals have a difficult time distinguishing between learning and other portions of their life (Houle). Two separate self -conceptions of learning surface from those in the learning-oriented classification. First, Houle (1961) identified these adults as individuals who are yearning to know and have a strong desire to learn. Houle observed their attitude was typically formed during childhood. Learning -oriented adults admit they are dissimilar from the majority of their contemporaries in this regard. Second, adults in this classification acknowledge that continued learning is a method that leads to personal enjoyment. In certain situations, fun may be the distinct purpose for an adults participation in continued learning (Houle). To summarize Houles (1961) observations no particular orientation is better than the others. The differences in adults are the focal point of Houles Typology. The similar attribute of each individual is a perpetual learner. However, learners differences are what should be studied. Comprehend ing that adults are in one of these three classifications is helpful in discerning and guiding adult education (Houle). A specific course or educational program may draw individuals from all three classifications with each participating for their own respe ctive objectives. The adult is considerably more able than the youth to know, to understand, to explore, to appreciate,

PAGE 32

32 discern subtle relationships, to judge, and to look behind the surface of things to their deeper meaning (Houle, p. 30). Motivational Orientations Boshier constructed the Education Participation Scale consisting of forty-eight items as a derivative of Houles adult learning orientation typology (Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2006). Given the depth of the scale, the need existed t o develop sub-constructs. The EPS was segregated into three modules: Cognitive Interest, Orientation to Activities, and Professional Advancement (Boshier & Collins, 1985). Each module of the EPS consisted of more in-depth designations related to adult lear ning orientations. Mergener (1979) developed his version of the EPS from Boshiers. Mergener found the EPS was composed of six factors explaining adult orientations to learning: cognitive interest, interpersonal relations, community service, professional a dvancement, escape from routine, and compliance with external influence. The literature has been organized according to these six factors as well as literature on motivations to participate in Extension programs. The following are descriptions of each moti vational orientation outlined by Mergener: Cognitive Interest Cognitive interest is searching for knowledge for the sake of knowledge (Boshier, 1971). The M EPS has been utilized to understand the effect of cognition on learning motivation. Mergener (197 9) found cognitive interest was the chief motivational orientation for pharmacists to participate in continuing education programs. Cognitive interest was the most prominent variable for non traditional students participating in a post graduate pharmacy ed ucation program (Garst & Ried, 1999). Cognitive interest was the primary motivation for adults choosing to participate in adult education courses (Carr, 1982). Adults participated in a nontraditional degree program because

PAGE 33

33 they felt an internal need to le arn (Phipps, 1987). Lenick (1986) found cognitive interest was the chief motivation for non traditional adult women returning to postsecondary education. Goad (1984) found adult white females participated in continued education for cognitive interests. Spr ouse (1982) indicated cognitive interest was the highest motivator for adults participating in continuing education. Health care professionals reported cognitive interest was the chief motivation for participation in continued education. Nurses participate d in advanced educational opportunities in order to increase their professional knowledge (Gale, 1991; Garrett, 1984; Mangubat, 2005). Increased cognition was the leading motivation for public health workers to participate in continuing education (Towers, 2003). Cognitive interest was the central motivation for retirees to participate in educational programs (Fisher, 1986; Garofolo, 1995; Russett; 1999). Edlow (1983) reported adults were motivated by their cognitive interest to participate in Elderhostels. Increasing cognition drove retired professionals and nonprofessionals to participate in a continuing professional education program in Mississippi (Farmer, 2008). Also, older adults reported cognitive interest was their motivation for beginning law school (Waring, 1995). Adults were motivated by cognitive interest to participate in vocational programs and higher education. Kolner (1983) indicated cognitive interest was the primary motivation for adults participating in supplemental vocational programs. Adu lts enrolled in college courses mainly for addressing their cognitive interest (Cherwony, 1982). Reynolds (1986) reported adults participated as part time students at a community college for cognitive interest. Cognitive interest was the motivation for di verse groups participating in a variety of educational programs. Okafor (1997) found adult inmates at correctional institutions participated

PAGE 34

34 in educational programs for cognitive development. Miller (1991) reported learners in a college of agriculture off -campus certification program were primarily motivated to participate due to cognitive interest. Boccolucci (1992) found insurance company staff participated in an educational program primarily to increase their cognitive d evelopment. Adults participating in a sponsored community church program were motivated by cognitive interest (Baxter, 1990). Adults were motivated to participate in educational programs on music due to their cognitive interest ( Heintzelman 1989; Spell, 1989). Interpersonal Relations The EPS has allowed researchers to understand participatory motives of adults beyond cognitive interest. Social contact was the main motivation for adult learners to participate in Christian educational programs (Atkinson, 1990). Gallagher (1985) reported social contact motivated adults to participate in a religious program. Pastors participated in graduate religious schools in order to serve their community (Pai, 1990; Utendorf, 1985). Older adults recognized the influence of social contact on their participation in education. Sprouse (1981) indicated acquiring social contact was the primary motivation for older adults in attending classes within their community. Baxter (1990) found retirees f rom an apartment complex participated in educational opportunities for social contact. Social contact was reported as the preliminary motivational orientation for adults to participate in varied levels of education. Adults participated in a vocational program for social contact (McKenna, 1985). Long (1982) indicated adults participated in a GED preparation program mainly for social contact. Scott (1989) found adult women entering a nursing program were motivated by social contact more than any other variabl e. Adults participated in graduate school primarily for social contact (Allen, 1986; Pfeifer, 1996). Social contact and professional

PAGE 35

35 advancement motivated school educators to participate in staff development training ( Barry Cybulski 1991). Professional Advancement Previous literature suggested the professional development orientation was the primary motivation for adults to participate in education associated with assorted professions. Utilizing the EPS, Kremer (2006) fou nd professional development was the chief motivation for staff at a law firm to participate in educational programs. The possibility of advancing in their profession motivated adults to participate in a vocational program (McKenna, 1985). Professional adva ncement motivated nurses to participate in continuing education (Irwin, 1996; Nishikawa 1988; Thomas, 1984; Wai, 1993). Miller (1996) reported professional advancement was the chief motivation for females to participate i n postsecondary technical education. Palmer (1991) found the primary motivation for adults participating in community adult education centers was career development. Smith (1985) reported adult learners chief motivation for participating in educational programs was professional development. Ives (2003) found professional advancement was the main motivator for public school staff to participate in continued education. Gourley (1983) found professional advancement to be the primary motivation for adult to participate in community college programs. Professional advancement motivated adult learners to forego their career and enter higher education (Harper, 1994). Escape from Routine & Compliance with External Influence Mergener (1979) reported pharmacists part icipating in mandatory continuing education had more motives from the compliance with external influence construct than pharmacists participating in non -mandatory continuing education programs. Escape from routine was the least motivational variable for students participating in pharmacy education (Garst & Ried, 1999). However, very little research was published in regards to the escape from routine, and

PAGE 36

36 compliance with external influence constructs. This study will uncover if and how these two constructs i nfluence adult participation in the Florida Master Gardener program. Cognitive Interest & Professional Advancement Multiple constructs collectively and equally predicted adult motivations to participate in continued education. The combination of cognitiv e interest and professional development was identified as equally motivating for adults to participate in a variety of educational opportunities. Cognitive interest and professional advancement were the main motivators for adult learners in a program featu ring an asynchronous lesson ( Kreszock 1994). Oetman (1991) found cognitive interest and professional advancement were the main motivations for pastors participating in a continuing education program. Brown (1987) reported professional advancement and cognitive interest lead adults to participate in a distance telecourse. Law enforcement officers participated in continuing education for professional advancement and cognitive interest motives (Johnson, 1987). Adults particip ating in community college courses were predominately motivated for cognitive interest and professional advancement (Ensley, 1987; Westbrook, 1991). In summary, cognitive interest accentuates individuals who participate in education for the happiness it pr ovides, desire to enquire about the solution to a problem or for simply the purpose of learning (Boshier & Collins). Social stimulation emphasizes adults seeking acceptance from others, and desiring to escape boredom and frustrations from their current env ironment. Community service describes adults who desire to enhance their communities. External expectations details individuals that participate due to the advice of an authority figure or a personnel friend. Professional advancement accentuates adults str iving to enhance thei r careers, complete a certification, or mandate to participate due to a professional requirement (Boshier & Collins, 1985). The literature has been organized according to theses six factors, as well as research regarding adult particip ating in Extension programs.

PAGE 37

37 Master Gardener Demographic Characteristics Previous studies of Master Gardeners have indicated, the majority of respondents were older, white, educated, and average income adults (Rohs, Stribilng, & Westerfield, 2002; Rouse & Clawson, 1992; Ruppert et al., 1997; Waliczek, Zajicek & Lineberger, 2005). This study seeks to learn if identical demographic characteristics describe Florida Master Gardeners. Participation in Extension Programs One variable to assist researchers in det ermining why adults participate in Extension programs is learning. Overall, learning has been identified as the primary motivation for adults choosing to participate in an Extension Master Gardener program (Finch, 1997; Moravec, 2006; Schott, 2001; Schrock et al., 2000; Schrock, 1999; Simonson & Pals, 1990; Wolford, Cox, & Culp III, 2001). These findings illustrate that adults have been primarily interested in the Master Gardener Program for the educational opportunities. Research has identified various rea sons adults volunteered for the Master Gardener program. Adults continued to volunteer for Master Gardener mainly to learn new information (Finch, 1997; Meyer, 2004; Rouse & Clawson, 1992; Wolford, Cox, & Culp III, 2001). Volunteers reported increased know ledge was the most important advantage they received from Master Gardener (Kirsch & VanDerZanden, 2002). However, knowledge was not the only benefit that adults received from Master Gardener. Community service is an important aspect of Master Gardener opportunities provided to adult participants (Stouse & Marr, 1992). Serving people is a chief reason adults volunteered for the Master Gardener program (Schrock, 1999). Rohs, Stribilng, and Westerfield (2002) found adults volunteered in the Master Gardener pr ogram for the sense of belonging to a group. Master Gardeners volunteer time provided them experiences and opportunities to interact with others through their teaching experiences ( Flagler, 1992). Rohs and Westerfield (1996) reported adults

PAGE 38

38 were more lik ely to volunteer for Master Gardener when the potential for them to receive personal benefits was high. Master Gardener provided adults an increase in self -esteem, social endeavors, and physical exercise (Boyer, Waliczek, & Zajicek, 2002; Waliczek, Zajicek & Lineberger, 2005). Prison inmates in South Carolina participated in Master Gardener in order to learn new vocational skills (Polomski, Johnson, & Anderson, 1997). Motivational orientations can best be summarized by illustrating (a) Competence related Curiosity is the motivation to learn, (b) Community Service is the motivation to serve ones local community, (c) Interpersonal Relations is the motivation to meet new people, (d) Escape from Routine is the motivation to participate in something different i n life, (e) External Influence is the motivation to participate based upon extrinsic factors, (f) Professional Advancement is the motivation to participate for reasons associated with a profession. Self -Efficacy Theory Bandura (1993) said self -efficacy wa s the extent beliefs regarding the capacity to stimulate control over performance and incidents that influence their lives. The affect of self -efficacy contributes to an adults motivation to participate in an activity. Bandura (1986) suggested self effica cy is correlated with learner motivation. Self -efficacy will impact how adults cogitate, form opinions, inspire themselves, and act (Bandura, 1997). Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) suggested educator self -efficacy describes an instructors confiden ce in the aptitude to bring about learner engagement and learning outcomes including demanding learners. Adults that have low self -efficacy in specific duties are less likely to participate in activities that require attributes involving those same duties (Bandura, 1997). These individuals struggle motivating themselves and concede defeat abruptly when confronted with trials. They are characterized as lowly motivated and lacking a strong commitment in pursuit of personal objectives. Adults with low self -ef ficacy fixate on imperfections, the challenges of a goal, and

PAGE 39

39 the undesirable consequences of letdowns in strenuous environments. Bandura (1997) indicated these individuals squander time reflecting on insufficiencies and potential mishaps. As a result of this, individuals become weakened due to the intentions of attempting to ensure personal objectives are addressed. Additionally, they require more time to recuperate feelings of efficacy following letdowns or obstacles than adults with high self -efficacy. Individuals quickly lose confidence in aptitude due to the analysis of poor accomplishment as inadequate skills. Low self efficacy adults become casualties of stress and dejection (Bandura, 1993). Enhanced sociocognitive meaning is produced from individuals with high self -efficacy. Adults confident in their abilities address complex undertakings as opportunities to be successful (Bandura, 1997). The facet of challenging opportunities encourages their interest and engages individuals in endeavors. High se lf -efficacy adults establish lofty goals, sustain a robust obligation to those goals, devote enhanced efforts in their duties, and improve their efforts in the face of letdowns. Higher sociocognitive adults consider advantages by continuing to be task orie nted in times of trials and accredit letdowns to inadequate efforts. High self -efficacy adults are success oriented and thus promptly recuperate their feeling of efficacy after letdowns (Bandura, 1993). These adults address perils believing they can manage them. Adults with higher efficacy have improved accomplishments, decreased stress levels, and are less susceptible to dejection (Bandura, 1997). These attributes of self -efficacy operationally contribute to individual accomplishments. Bandura described methods to construct self -efficacy in adults. Individual influences affect the variety and formation of their environments (Bandura, 1993). Human motivation, action, and affect are examples of individual influences. Environmental pressures impact adults m otivation and achievements are heavily arbitrated through individual influences (Bandura).

PAGE 40

40 Individual influences function as significant affects at the center of unexpected incidents. The most persistent means of activity are individuals convictions regar ding their ability to control personal meaning and episodes that shape their lives. Bandura (1992) reported individual self efficacy beliefs create varying outcomes through four processes. Those processes are cognitive, motivational, affective, and selecti on (Bandura, 1993). Cognitive Processes Aptitude is a broad capacity where cognitive, social, motivational, and behavioral competences must be coordinated and operationally implemented in order to serve various objectives (Bandura, 1993). Individuals cre ate objectives according to a personal assessment of their aptitude. Adults are more committed to enhanced personal goals they have constructed due to confidence in their efficacy (Bandura, 1991). Bandura (1993) reported individuals perceptions of self -ef ficacy dictate how they compose and prepare for anticipated circumstances in their lives. Performance is impacted by the degree of self -efficacy individuals have. Bandura (1993) indicated individuals with increased self -efficacy demand successful environ ments that assist performance and include positive mentors. Likewise, individuals with decreased self -efficacy possess uncertainty and assume the worst will occur. An accomplishment is hard to attain when one is skeptical of ones own capabilities (Bandura 1993). Possessing knowledge and capabilities does not translate into an individual capable of utilizing them. Bandura (1993) found personal confidence of efficacy is required for individuals to be able to attain their achievements. Individuals with ident ical knowledge and skills may perform differently under equal circumstances due to differences in self -efficacy. Efficacy is required for individuals to remain task oriented while undergoing difficult circumstances (Bandura, 1993).

PAGE 41

41 Individuals evaluate th eir aptitude in comparison to the achievements of their peers. Those peers impact how individuals determine their aptitudes (Bandura, 1997). Also, social comparisons affect individuals self -esteem and the level of satisfaction attributed from their achiev ements. Bandura (1993) suggested robust individual efficacy inferences are derived from comparison assessments. The manner individual progress is evaluated on social comparisons of objectives may robustly affect efficacy and thus modify the sequence of goa l achievement (Bandura, 1997). Bandura (1993) recommended providing individuals with feedback on their personal development due to the fact this accentuates individual aptitude. Also, learning environments play a significant role in the attainment of individual efficacy. Learning environments that interpret aptitude as a learnable skill, pay less attention to social comparison competitions, and underscore personal comparisons of development and achievements are a best fit for constructing an efficacy sett ing that encourages enhanced learning (Bandura, 1993). The exercise of control is the extent to which individuals feel their circumstances are controllable (Bandura, 1992). An individuals environment provides opportunities and constraints in exercising self -efficacy. Bandura (1997) reported adults with low efficacy deliver insufficient change in environments with prospective opportunities due to doubt of their attempts. Individuals owning a robust confidence in their efficacy create methods to exercise control regardless of the limitations present in their environment (Bandura, 1993). Individuals professed self -efficacy affects the implementation of objectives and critical thinking. Motivational Processes Bandura (1991) found motivation is an offspring of individuals perceptions of efficacy. People develop attitudes in regards to what they can accomplish. Individuals motivate themselves and pursue their exploits through the application of anticipation (Bandura, 1993).

PAGE 42

42 Individuals construct objectives for themselves and set up sequences of exploits designed to fulfill meaningful attributes. Bandura (1993) suggested discretion is explained into incentives and appropriate action through self -regulatory methods. Individuals rely on personal attitudes to ac quire accomplishments and personal attitudes measure the anticipated results of performance. Bandura (1997) found numerous opportunities are not taken due to individuals lack of aptitude. Thus, self -beliefs of potential dictate the likely motivation of e xpected results (Bandura, 1993). Behavior is conducted and motivated by the objectives at the moment versus being drawn through an unfulfilled prospective condition (Bandura, 1993). Objectives are self -influenced rather than controlled through motivation and deeds. Individuals navigate their behavior and construct rewards in order to endure attempts until their objectives are completed (Bandura, 1993). Bandura (1997) indicated individuals pursue fulfillment through accomplishing assessed objectives and are stimulated to strengthen their attempts by dissatisfaction with poor achievements. Bandura (1997) said perceptions of self -efficacy establish the objectives that individuals set for themselves, the attempts they supply to accomplish those objectives, the extent they endure in hardships, and their resistance to disappointments. These influences explain primary shares of differences in motivation. Bandura (1992) reported individuals with compelling attitudes in their aptitude put forth enhanced efforts afte r they fail in accomplishing an objective. Those who doubt their ability relax their attempts or surrender abruptly when confronted with barriers or disappointments. Performance achievements are typically attributed to robust perseverance from individuals (Bandura, 1993). The incongruity between individuals understood performance and accepted standard stimulates exploits to decrease the discrepancy in efficacy (Bandura, 1993). Motivation requires

PAGE 43

43 proactive management and reactive response. Bandura (1997) suggested individuals motivate and direct their exploits through proactive management by establishing challenging objectives that construct a condition of disequilibrium. A robust sense of efficacy causes individuals to set enhanced objectives after their initial objective is accomplished (Bandura, 1997). Implementing additional challenges constructs new motivating differences for individuals to achieve. Bandura (1993) indicated individual motivation involves a twofold management process of motivating perf ormance in discrepancies followed by decreasing discrepancies. Affective Processes Bandura (1997) reported individuals perceptions of their aptitude and degree of motivation affect the amount of anxiety and dejection they experience in intimidating or c hallenging conditions. Individuals who feel they are able to cope with challenges do not create thought processes centered on anxiety. Likewise, individuals experience high anxiety due to their beliefs that they cannot cope with challenges due to a lack ef ficacy (Bandura, 1993). These individuals become concerned about incidents that seldom occur and amplify their seriousness. This facet weakens their degree of propelling toward the recognized objective (Bandura, 1997). Anxiety is influenced through identi fied coping efficacy and perceived efficacy to manage bothersome thinking (Bandura, 1993). The perception of self -efficacy to manage thinking mechanisms is a chief component in controlling thought generated anxiety and despair. Ozer and Bandura (1990) found individual self -efficacy and thought management function together to decrease anxiety and escaping behavior. Disappointments lessen learners perceived efficacy and they become apprehensive regarding educational requirements. Learners possessing low eff icacy to cope with academic requirements are susceptible to success anxiety (Bandura, 1997). However, when learners efficacy withstands disappointments, individuals remain focused. Bandura (1993) reported

PAGE 44

44 learners perceptions of aptitude in mastering edu cational subject matter predict their ensuing educational achievements. This implies the need to reduce educational stress. Bandura (1993) reported constructing a robust sense of efficacy is the best antidote for decreasing educational anxiety. A sense of efficacy is built through the development of cognitive aptitudes and self regulative proficiencies for managing educational assignments (Bandura, 1997). Selection Processes Standards of self -efficacy can form the path individuals choose by influencing the selection of actions and surroundings (Bandura, 1993). Individuals avoid endeavors when they feel those surpass their coping aptitudes. However, individuals accept challenging endeavors and choose scenarios they are capable of handling. Factors influenci ng selection behavior can deeply affect their course of personal development. Through their selections, individuals develop distinct competencies, pastimes, and social networks that influence life directions. Efficacy control procedures influence how prese nt cognitive skills are employed in coping with requirements of daily life. The responsibility of constructing environments beneficial to learning leans profoundly on the aptitudes and self -efficacy of instructors. Bandura (1997) indicated instructors wi th a minimal amount of teaching efficacy spend more time on non-educational activities, more quickly concede defeat with learners, and criticize learners for failing to achieve success. Literature indicates learning environments are to some extent establis hed by instructors beliefs in their teaching efficacy. Instructors who have strong beliefs in their teaching efficacy produce mastery experiences for their learners (Bandura, 1993). Likewise, instructors who doubt their aptitude create learning environmen ts that are likely to weaken learners self -efficacy and cognitive growth. Teachers with a minimal level of teaching efficacy prefer a managing orientation that leans on extrinsic enticements and negative measures to get students to learn.

PAGE 45

45 Instructors conf ident in their teaching efficacy encourage learners intrinsic pursuits and self directed learning. Supporting Literature Agricultural Teacher Education Research indicates efficacy is a factor in assisting the success of preservice agricultural educators. Knobloch and Whittington (2002) found collective efficacy was theoretically and operationally similar to teacher efficacy. Teaching in a setting similar to what students would encounter as professionals improved their teaching efficacy (Knobloch, 2001). Knobloch (2002) reported teachers may have felt efficacious in their teaching and their student teaching experiences confirmed their beliefs. Kelsey (2007) found increased self -efficacy was the influential variable that characterized women who succeeded as a secondary agricultural education teachers. Professional and life experiences influenced preservice agriculture teachers level of efficacy (Duncan & Ricketts, 2006; Rocca & Washburn, 2006). Preservice agriculture teachers viewed themselves as having the highest efficacy in instructional practices after their student teaching experience (Roberts, Harlin, & Ricketts, 2006; Stripling et al., 2008). Likewise, student teachers may experience a high efficacy due to having a cooperating instructor providing a supportive teaching environment (Knoblach, 2006). Knoblach and Whittington (2003) found agricultural education teachers with a high sense of teaching efficacy were more likely to cope and thrive when faced with difficult teaching assignments. In a study conducted in Oregon and Washington, agricultural educators had a high sense of efficacy for instructional strategies in teaching mathematics (Jansen, 2008). Volunteers Educational programs relying on volunteers in the public sector should utilize adults that have efficacy in their roles in order for the organization to be the most effective (Brudney, 1999).

PAGE 46

46 The inclusion of adult volunteers with instructional efficacy has proven to be beneficial for educational programs and professional educators. Kagan e t al. (2001) reported volunteers with instructional efficacy had more success in communicating through intervention with patients than volunteers with little instructional efficacy. Adult volunteers instructional efficacy provided professional educators w ith assistance in improving English language learning for Chinese adults (Zheng et al., 2006). Literature identified the effectiveness of older volunteers as volunteer educators in delivering educational programs. Dorph, Wik, and Steen (2003) found elderl y adult volunteers helped CPR professionals to deliver effective training to more participants due to their instructional efficacy. Older adults instructional efficacy as volunteer educators was effective in a nationwide caregiving program (Etkin et al., 2006). Adult volunteers instructional efficacy as classroom paraprofessionals assisted elementary school teachers in improving students reading comprehension (Rebok et al., 2004). In a study conducted by Kim (2005), volunteers who possessed more instruct ional efficacy were more willing to participate in training related to teaching strategies. Trainin and Andrezejczak (2006) reported volunteer educators in Nebraska improved elementary students reading scores through their instructional efficacy. Cooperat ive Extension A deficiency exists in the amount of research published as to the effect of adult volunteer motivational orientations and instructional efficacy on participation in the Master Gardener program. This study attempts to alleviate a portion of this deficiency. Volunteer educators are important to the objectives of Cooperative Extension. Adult volunteers are clients and representatives of UF IFAS/Extension (Ruppert, Bradshaw, & Stewart, 1997). Collins and Layne (2003) reported volunteers who were trained to teach had more instructional efficacy than

PAGE 47

47 volunteers who were not trained or prepared in an Extension program focused on wellness education. VanDerZanden (2001) suggested getting the most out of the skills and expertise of Master Gardener volu nteers is a functional method to improve the quality of the program. Summary Chapter 2 presented data related to the theoretical framework of the study. Houles (1961) Typology was presented and described the three orientations for adults to participate in education: goal, activity and learning. The Mergener (1979) Education Participation Scale was explained along with the six constructs of learner motivation embedded in the instrument: cognitive interest, interpersonal relations, community service, profe ssional advancement, escape from routine and compliance with external influence. Banduras (1997) definition of self -efficacy was presented. Tschannen -Moran and Woolfolk Hoys Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (2001) was described the construct of instructio nal efficacy. The inclusion of instructional efficacy was important to understand as Master Gardeners are volunteer educators. Information on how the theoretical framework guided the selection of variables for the study was presented. Supporting literatur e associated with the studys variables (adult learner motivations and instructional efficacy) was presented. The conceptual framework for the study is illustrated on the next page ( Figure 2 1). The conceptual framework illustrates the interaction of demographic characteristics, motivational orientations (Competence related Curiosity, Interpersonal Relations, Community Service, Escape from Routine, Professional Advancement and External Influence) and instructional efficacy of Master Gardeners predicts MG te nure.

PAGE 48

48 Figure 2 1 Conceptual Framework Highlighting the Foundations of the Study Adult Participation In Master Gardener Handle difficult questions from your clients G auge client comprehension of you r teaching Ability to craft good questions for your clients Adjust information to proper level for individuals Comfort with evaluation strategies Describe differently when clients do not understand Ability to implement alternative teaching strategies Demographic Characteristics of Master Gardener s Motivational Orientations Instructional Efficacy Competency related Curios ity Interpersonal Relations Community Service Escape from Routine Professional Advancement Compliance with External Influence

PAGE 49

49 CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Introduction Chapter 1 indicated the need and purpose of this study was to measure the motivational orientations and te acher efficacy of Florida Master Gardener participants as volunteer educators. The study sought to measure motivational orientations and teacher efficacy through the implementation of the Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scale and the Teacher Sens e of Efficacy Scale (Tschannen -Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). As reported in Chapter 2, previous literature and relevant theoretical conceptual frameworks were examined. Chapter 3 explains the research design, the objectives of this study, the target and act ual population, how the population was sampled, the Mergener Education Participation Scale and Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scales measures of validity and reliability, data collection, and analysis. Research Design Quantitative research inquiry was select ed as the research paradigm for this study. Quantitative research is initiated with a hypothesis, has a theory, manipulates and controls variables, analyzes each piece, and uses numerical data (Agresti & Finlay, 1997). Quantitative research examines cause and effect, is developed prior to the study, utilizes deductive reasoning to examine theories, employs standardized measurements, and analyzes numerical data (Ary et al., 2006). The quantitative research design served as the preeminent approach in assisting the researcher in ascertaining the solution to the research question. The researcher utilized an ex post facto design to assist with answering the research question. An Ex post facto design is employed to investigate cause and-effect relationships when the researcher is unable to manipulate the independent variable (Ary et al., 2006). Groups are compared with differing independent variables to ascertain their effect on the dependent variable.

PAGE 50

50 The studys independent variables were participant demographi c characteristics, instructional efficacy, Competence related Curiosity, Community Service, Interpersonal Relations, Escape from Routine, External Influence, and Professional Advancement motivational orientations. The dependent variable was adult volunteer tenure in the Florida Master Gardener program. Ary et al. said an ex post facto design can enable the researcher to test hypotheses regarding potential dependent variables while understanding the disparity that exists among the subjects on the independent variables. Shavelson (1996) said ex post facto designs are the most commonly utilized to describe the associations between two variables. Ary et al. (2006) indicated common statistics used in experimental research are also used in ex post facto designs. The researcher should calculate the mean and standard deviation in each group. Second, a t test should be initiated to identify differences in the means of two groups or an ANOVA (analysis of variance) should employed if more than two groups assist in the study. Chi -square can be utilized to uncover if a result arises repeatedly in one group compared to a different group. A researcher should take into account common cause, reverse causality, and the presence of other independent variables for interpreting ex post facto research due to the inability to control for the independent variables which reduces internal validity (Ary et al., 2006). Common cause refers to the potential that the independent and dependent variables are the offspring of a third variabl e. Reverse causality is opposite of the stated hypothesis. Perhaps the dependent variable produced the independent variable instead of the independent variable instigating the dependent variable as hypothesized (Ary et al.). Other independent variables bes ides the ones in the study can cause the observed effect in the dependent variable too. Objectives of the Study 1 To describe participant demographics in the Florida Master Gardener program.

PAGE 51

51 2 To describe Master Gardeners efficacy in instructional strategies as volunteer educators; specifically: (a) ability to respond to difficult questions, (b) ability to gauge client comprehension of the information taught, (c) ability to craft good questions for clients, (d) ability to adjust information to the proper leve l for individual clients, (e) comfort with using evaluation strategies, (f) ability to provide an alternative explanation when clients are confused, and (g) the ability to implement alternative teaching strategies in their instruction. 3 To describe the mot ivational orientation for adults to participate in Master Gardener; specifically: (a) Competency related Curiosity, (b) Interpersonal Relations, (c) Community Service, (d) Escape from Routine, (e) Professional Advancement, and (f) Compliance with External Influence. 4 To determine if significant differences exist between efficacy in instructional strategies based on participant demographics. 5 To determine if significant differences exist between motivational orientations based on participant demographics. 6 To d escribe any existing relationships between efficacy in instructional strategies and motivational orientations for adults participating in Master Gardener. 7 To test the unidimensionality of Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scale. 8 To understand eff ects of motivational orientations and efficacy in instructional strategies on Master Gardener tenure. Population The population in this study was adult participants of the Florida Extension Master Gardener program. Approximately 3,822 adult Floridians par ticipate in the Master Gardener program (E. Eubanks, personal communication, March 8, 2009). There are 58 counties in the state of Florida that have Master Gardener programs (T. Wichman, personal communication, March 6, 2009). Master Gardener programs exi st in each of the five Florida Extension districts. According to Cochran (1977), a sample size of 362 usable surveys was required for a confidence interval of +/ 5 when N = 3,822. Response rates reported in recent literature are utilized to determine the potential response rate for future research involving a mail survey with a similar population (Bartlett, Kotrlik, & Higgins, 2001). For mail surveys, 5 to 10 % should be added to the total sample size in order to account for incorrect participant mailing addresses,

PAGE 52

52 participants who may have recently passed away, and for questionnaires with incomplete participant responses (Babbie, 1990; Salkind, 1997).The response rate was anticipated to be between 62 and 68% due to response rates in previous research util izing a mail survey with Master Gardeners (Rexroad, 2003; Schott, 2001; Schrock, 1999; Sutton, 2006). The sample size was 613 Master Gardener participants (362 usable surveys 65% average response rate 10% = a sample size of 613). The result of this ap proach is oversampling. However, oversampling is not viewed as a detriment in social science research because estimating response rates is not an exact science (Fink, 1995). The implementation of oversampling ensures a sufficient sample size through the co mpletion of an oversampling approach in a more direct procedure (Cohen, 2004). Sampling Method The researcher utilized stratified sampling to select the population. Stratified sampling provides more representative samples than simple random sampling by e nsuring the proper representation of the stratification variables and this results in improving the representation of other variables related to them (Babbie, 2007). Stratified random sampling separates the population into distinct groups, and then chooses a simple random sample from each group (Agresti & Finlay, 1997). Ary et al. (2006) suggested stratified sampling can offer a more descriptive sample than simple random sampling due to the sampled population not being homogenous. The study incorporated pro portional sampling in order for the proportions in each group to be equal to those in the total population. Stratified random samples should explain the variances of subpopulations, strata, or clusters before an estimate of the variability in the populati on as a whole can be made (Israel, 1992, p. 4). The advantage of stratified random sampling is that the approach allows the researcher to divide the population into subgroups and identify differences among each subgroup of the total population (Ary et al .).

PAGE 53

53 A geographical stratified sampling method was employed for this study. Florida Cooperative Extension is divided into five distinct districts: Northwest, Northeast, Central, South Central, and South (UF IFAS/Extension, 2008). The Northwest District ha d 586 Master Gardeners, the Northeast had 521 Master Gardeners, the Central had 1,209 Master Gardeners, the South Central had 876 Master Gardeners, and the South had 630 adult Master Gardeners (T. Wichman, personal communication, May 6, 2009). The sum of M aster Gardeners in the five Extension districts (stratum) was N = 3,822. Proportional sample allocation was utilized as the sampling technique to select the samples. The sample size in each stratum (district) was selected in proportion to the size of the s tratum. The samples were: 1 Number of sample in Northwest district = (586/3,822) 613 = 94 2 Number of sample in Northeast district = (521/3,822) 613 = 84 3 Number of sample in Central district = (1,209/3,822) 613 = 194 4 Number of sample in South Central district = (876/3,822) 613 = 140 5 Number of sample in South district = (630/3,822) 613 = 101 A total of 613 Master Gardeners were randomly selected for this study. A list of the Master Gardeners in each county was provided by the Master Gardener coordinator in that county. Counties were purposively selected from each district according to the stratum needed in that district in order for the study to be representative of the total population. Respondents were selected with the use of random number generator in Excel 2007. Escambia County ( n = 93 Master Gardeners), Okaloosa County ( n = 86 Master Gardeners), and Bay County ( n = 18 Master Gardeners) counties were selected in the Northwest district ( n = 197 Master Gardeners). These counties provided the researcher the ap propriate number of respondents for the Northwest district stratum ( N = 94). In the Northeast district, Clay County ( n = 92 Master Gardeners), Columbia County ( n = 34 Master Gardeners), and Alachua County ( n = 79 Master Gardeners) were purposively

PAGE 54

54 selected. The counties offered the appropriate number of respondents ( N = 97) needed from the Northeast district. With ( n = 403), Volusia County ( n = 150 Master Gardeners), Lake County ( n = 97 Master Gardeners), Osceola County ( n = 91 Master Gardeners), and Seminole County ( n = 65 Master Gardeners) were purposively selected for the Central district. These Central district counties provided the researcher the appropriate number of subjects for this stratum ( N = 194). Also, the researcher chose not to select counties in the Central district where he was employed as an Extension agent in order to avoid researcher bias (Ary et al., 2006). For the South Central Extension district, Sarasota County ( n = 118 Master Gardeners), Hillsborough County ( n = 116 Master Gardeners ), and Collier County ( n = 79 Master Gardeners) were selected with a total n = 313. The purposive sampling of these counties met the stratum for the South Central district ( N = 140). Martin County ( n = 102 Master Gardeners), St. Lucie County ( n = 66 Master Gardeners), and Highlands County ( n = 48 Master Gardeners) were chosen to sample for the South district ( n = 216). These counties met the stratum for the South district ( N = 101). Instrumentation Mergeners Education Participation Scale Two instruments were used to gather data for this study. Mergener (1979) constructed his version of the Education Participation Scale consisting of forty three items as a derivative of Houles (1961) adult learning orientation typology and Boshiers (1971) Education Parti cipation Scale. Given the depth of the scale, the need existed to develop sub-constructs. Each module of the M EPS consisted of more in -depth designations related to motivational orientations. Garst and Ried (1999) reported the M EPS was constructed of si x factors explaining adult orientations to learning: Competency -related Curiosity (CRC), Interpersonal Relations (IR), Community

PAGE 55

55 Service (CS), Escape from Routine (ER), Professional Advancement (PA), and Compliance with External Influence (CEI). Variable s on Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scale were measured on a 5 point scale: 1 = very much influence, 2 = much influence, 3 = moderate influence, 4 = little influence, 5 = very little influence (Garst & Ried, 1999, p. 301). Mergeners EPS was derived from the EPS developed by Boshier (1971). A reliability and factoring experiment was conducted on Boshiers Education Participation Scale, and all 48 items correlation coefficients had a critical value significant at the .001 level (Boshier). The re sults indicated all items were reliable. Garst and Ried (1999) reported the M -EPS was a valid instrument for assessing influential motivations of pharmacists in pharmaceutical education. Each of the factors had alphas equal or larger than .70 except Profe ssional Advancement. Table 3 1 illustrates the reliability coefficients of each construct of the M EPS reported by Garst and Ried. Table 3 1 Reliability Coefficients for each construct of the Mergener Education Participation Scale Construct Alpha Co mmunity Service .86 Interpersonal Relations .85 Competency-related Curiosity .83 Escape from Routine items .78 Compliance with External Influence .70 Professional Advancement .60 Six factors were extracted by the factor analysis of the M EPS (M ergener, 1979). In order for a factor to be considered important, at a minimum three statements must have loaded on it. A loading of +0.40 or considerably larger on a statement was explanation enough for a statement to be included in a factor (Mergener). T his process was conducted through the maximum likelihood method of factor analysis with varimax rotation (Mergener). The factor loadings accounted for 48% of the total variance and 89% of the explained variance (Mergener).

PAGE 56

56 The M EPS has not been used to di scover what motivates adults to participate in the Master Gardener program. Boshier and Collins (1983) reported variables on the M EPS predicted how constructs involved the dependent variable. The researchers pilot study will serve to add to the research in regards to the reliability and validity of the M EPS. Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale Tschannen -Moran, Woolfolk Hoy, and Hoy (1998) identified teaching efficacy as the aptitude of the instructor to investigate the objective related to teaching and feel proficient in achieving the objective. The Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale is composed of 24 items that include three constructs. The three constructs were efficacy in classroom management, efficacy in student engagement, and efficacy in instructional str ategies. For this study, the construct of efficacy in instructional strategies was utilized. Tschannen -Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) measured variables on a nine point scale with the TSES consisting of a long form with 24 items and a short form with 12 it ems. Respondents were asked How much can you do? with 9 = a great deal 7 = quite a bit 5 = some influence 3 = very little and 1 = nothing. Principal axis factoring analysis with varimax rotation yielded the three factors (efficacy for instructional s trategies, efficacy for classroom management, efficacy for student engagement) with loadings varying from 0.50 to 0.78 (TschannenMoran & Woolfolk Hoy). The factor loadings from instructional strategies for the seven questions on efficacy in instructional strategies ranged from 0.57 to 0.72 (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy). The reliability levels for the teacher efficacy subscales were 0.91 for instruction, 0.90 for management, and 0.87 for engagement (Tschannen -Moran & Woolfolk Hoy). Intercorrelations amon g the long and short forms for the total scale and three subscales ranged from 0.95 to 0.98. Goddard, Hoy, and Hoy (2000) found the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale (TSES) to be valid and reliable in a study with 70 schools across five states. The TSES was found to be valid

PAGE 57

57 and reliable in a study of elementary school teachers in Texas (Henson, Kogan, & Vacha Hasse, 2001). Heneman, Kimball and Milanowski (2006) reported the TSES met the requirements of construct validity and reliability with an alpha of 0.9 1 in their study of over 1,000 classroom teachers in a large school district in Nevada. In a study consisting of over 130 teachers in juvenile correction facilities in the United States, the TSES was determined to be valid and reliable (Ren et al., 2008). Capa (2005) found the TSES was a valid and reliable instrument for assessing factors influencing first year teachers efficacy in Ohio. Brouwers and Tomic (2003) indicated the TSES was a valid instrument for surveying secondary school teachers in the Net herlands. In a study involving over 700 elementary and middle school teachers in Canada, Cyprus, Korea, Singapore and the United States, the TSES was concluded to be valid and reliable (Klassen et al., 2008). Cheung (2008) reported the TSES was valid and r eliable in a study involving approximately 1,300 in-service primary school educators in Shanghai and Hong Kong with Cronbachs alpha for teaching efficacy being .87. The TSES was a valid and reliable instrument in evaluating 23 educators in 9 rural and imp overished schools in Zimbabwe (Dunham, & Songony, 2008). Tschannen -Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) utilized literature and a panel of experts to establish content validity and reliability for the TSES. The reliability alpha for instructional practices was 91. TschannenMoran (2000) reported subscale scores of the TSES may be employed to evaluate teaching efficacy. For this study, it was concluded that the short version of the TSES construct of instructional strategies would appropriately measure Master Gard eners teaching efficacy. Both long and short forms were examined by Tschannen -Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) with two distinct factor analyses (one with preservice teachers and the other with inservice

PAGE 58

58 teachers). Principal axis factoring with varimax rotat ion explained 54% of the variance on the long form and 65% on the short form for inservice teachers. Preservice teachers responses accounted for 57% on the long form and 61% of the variance on the short form. Reliability of the 24 item scale was 0.94 on t he long form and 0.90 for the short form. Therefore, both subscales scores (24 item & 12 item) and total scores can be utilized to measure efficacy (TschannenMoran & Woolfolk Hoy). The correlation of the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale and other correlat ions of teacher efficacy measures addressed construct validity. Tschannen -Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001) found total scores on the TSES long form (24 items) were positively related to the general teacher efficacy (GTE) factor ( r = 0.16, p < 0.01), and the G ibson and Dembo (1984) teaching efficacy measure ( r = 0.64, p <0.01). The positive correlations with other measures of teaching efficacy provide verification of construct validity. The 12 item scale results were similar to those from the long form. Tschannen Moran and Woolfolk Hoy reported the results of these analyses indicate that the TSES is reasonably valid and reliable. The TSES instructional efficacy construct has not been used to discover how Master Gardeners perceive their instructional strategies a s volunteer educators. Data Collection Survey Design The questionnaire included the M EPS (Part I), the efficacy in instructional strategies construct of the TSES long form (Part II), and demographic questions (Part III). The data collection instrument wa s printed in an 8.5 x 11 booklet layout and then mailed to the sampled population. Participants were asked to mail the questionnaire back to the researcher. Data was collected October 25 thru December 1, 2009.

PAGE 59

59 The researchers survey design and data col lection methodology was based on the Dillman, Smyth, and Christians (2009) Tailored Design Method. The Tailored Design Method consists of five facets: a respondent -friendly questionnaire, up to five contacts with the questionnaire addressee, included stam ped return envelopes, correspondence that is personalized, and a token financial incentive that is sent with the survey request. Dillman et al. recommended the questionnaire should be easy to understand and visually appealing to the participant. Each of th e five contacts must be different than the previous one. Dillman et al. suggested the first contact is when the subject receives a prenotice letter from the researcher detailing their involvement in the study is voluntarily and valuable. The second contact is the mailed questionnaire that includes a cover letter describing why the response is important. The third contact is a thank you postcard that is sent to the subject a few days up to a week after the questionnaire (Dillman et al.). The fourth contact includes a replacement questionnaire for the nonrespondents two to four weeks after the initial questionnaire mailing. Lastly, the fifth contact is initiated a week after the fourth contact by telephone (Dillman, et al.). Four contacts were made in this stu dy. Communicating with respondents is an integral part of conducting a mail survey. Dillman, et al. (2009) recommended pre letters should alert respondents to the survey. Cover letters should follow informed consent procedures by having participants sign c onsent forms and mailing them back to the researcher. Post card reminders should be used between questionnaire mailings. Follow up mailings have proven to be essential for the best response (Dillman et al.). Dillman, et al. (2009) contact sequence outlines methods to increase response rate from participants. Based on Dillman et al., a pre -letter was mailed to selected participants on Monday, October 26th. A detailed cover letter including the questionnaire was mailed to participants three days later on Thursday, October 29th. On Wednesday, November 4th (six days after the cover

PAGE 60

60 letter and questionnaire mailing), a thank you post card or a reminder was sent by the researcher. On Thursday, November 12th, a second questionnaire was mailed to nonrespondents wi th special contact information (Dillman et al.). Data collection concluded on Tuesday, December 1st. In order to establish trust, the researcher should have the research sponsored by a reputable organization and inform participants that the survey is important (Dillman, et al., 2009). In order to enhance rewards, the researcher should be positive, grateful, and solicit input. In order to decrease social costs, the researcher should make the survey short, be convenient and not gather too much personal infor mation (Dillman et al.). Dillman, et al. (2009) suggested notions on exchange should be communicated through visuals in order to construct the instrument. A researcher should understand their population, content and who is paying for the survey to constru ct successful methods enhancing rewards and improving response. A successful Tailored Design reduces survey errors from coverage, sampling, nonresponse and measurement. Dillman et al.s Tailored Design Method was administrated in order to enhance response rate. Response Rate The total N in the stratified sampled population was 613. Two reminders were sent to nonrespondents in the sampled population. Five hundred thirty two responses (86.79%) were received with 530 usable responses. Six pre -notice letters were returned to the researcher due to incorrect mailing addresses. Nonresponse Nonresponse error is the outcomes of individuals who reply to a survey but do not supply utilizable information or are dissimilar from sampled individuals who did not answer at all and have differentiating characteristics that are valuable to the study (Dillman, 2007). The researcher must ensure results are not different than if 100 percent response rate was achieved for

PAGE 61

61 generalizability to be met (Richardson, 2000). Failing t o address and control for nonresponse error are threats to external validity (Lindner, Murphy, & Briers, 2001). Nonresponse error was controlled for in this study by comparing early and late respondents. Late respondents should be operationally defined as individuals who respond during the final wave of respondents in consecutive follow ups to a survey (Lindner, Murphy, & Briers, 2001). Lindner et al. recommended the minimum number of late respondents should be 30 in order for the number of late respondent s to be statistically important. Major variables of interest served as assessments between early and late respondents. If no dissimilarities exist between early and late respondents then the studys outcomes are generalizable to the intended population (Lindner et al.). No significant differences existed; therefore the findings from this study were generalizable. Data Analysis SPSS 17 for WindowsTM was utilized to analyze the data from this study. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance, and regression analysis were selected as the procedures to analyze the studys objectives. The appropriateness of each procedure was based on each research objective and the studys research design. Descriptive statistics determine attributes of different groups in orde r to measure their attitudes toward a specific item. Descriptive statistics are a set of concepts and methods used in organizing, summarizing, tabulating, depicting and describing collections of data (Shavelson, 1996, p. 8). Arranging research data into frequency distributions is a fundamental aspect of descriptive statistics (Ary et al., 2006). In this study, the research data was organized to present descriptive statistics in a table format. Survey research employs questionnaires to gather data from t he population. Ary et al. (2006) explained survey research allows the researcher to condense the results of characteristics of dissimilar groups in order to assess their attitudes and opinions. A concern of survey research

PAGE 62

62 is representative sampling. Researchers should utilize either simple random, stratified random, proportionate, or non -probability as sampling techniques to ensure a representative sample of the total population in order to avoid sources of bias in survey research (Davis, 1971). Descriptiv e statistics were utilized in order to address the studys first, second, and third objectives. Agresti and Finlay (1997) identified descriptive statistics as the statistical method to encapsulate the information in a compilation of data. Shavelson (1996) suggested descriptive statistics are approaches and procedures applied in arranging, summarizing, calculating, and describing data. The variables indicate descriptive statistics were the most appropriate statistical method for measuring motivation orientat ions (Ary et al., 2006). Objective four (to determine if significant differences exist between motivational orientations based on participant demographics) and objective five (to determine if significant differences exist between efficacy in instructional strategies based on participant demographics) were measured through the implementation of t tests and analysis of variance (ANOVA). A t test determines whether the difference between two sample means is statistically significant (Ary et al., 2006, p. 211, 3). The total variance of all subjects can be subdivided into variances between groups and variances within groups. The resulting F ratio, in ANOVA, uses the variance of group means as a measure of observed difference among groups (Agresti & Finlay, 1997). ANOVA can examine the difference in two or more means. Shavelson (1996) reported if the F is significant, then at a minimum one of all potential comparisons between comparisons of means will be significant. However, the F test does not provide data on t he strength of the treatment effect (Agresti & Finlay). Effect sizes are statistics that evaluate the direction and strength of a difference between two means (Ary et al., 2006). A large effect size is d = .80, a medium effect size is d = .50, and a

PAGE 63

63 small effect size is d = .20 (Cohen, 1988). Cohens d is calculated with the standardized difference between two means divided by the datas standard deviation. Cohens definitions of small, medium, and large effect sizes have been widely recognized and impleme nted into numerous social science studies (Shavelson, 1996). Effect sizes should be reported for t tests and ANOVAs (Babbie, 1990). The sixth objective was to describe any existing relationships between efficacy in instructional strategies and motivatio nal orientations for adults participating in Master Gardener. Correlation coefficients are calculated to represent the correlation (Agresti & Finlay, 1997). Shavelson (1996) suggested the Pearson r reveals the strength and direction of the association amon g two variables. Correlations signify whether the association between variables is positive or negative. According to Davis (1971), there are tenets for formulating measures of the degree of association among variables: (1) When X and Y are independent they should equal .00, (2) A maximum of +1.00 exists for the strongest possible positive association, (3) X and Y should have a maximum of 1.00 for the strongest possible negative correlation, and (4) an intrinsic meaning should be present in the values. A value of r = +.70 or higher indicates a very strong association, +.50 to +.69 signifies a substantial positive association, +.30 to +.49 is a moderate positive association, +.10 to +.29 suggests a low positive association, +.01 to +.09 implies a negligible positive association, .00 means no association exists, .01 to -.09 indicates a negligible negative association, .10 to -.29 denotes a low negative association, .30 to -.49 represents a moderate negative association, .50 to -.69 suggests a substantial negative association, and .70 or lower indicates a very strong negative association (Davis). Independent variables that are not highly or moderately correlated with the dependent variables should not be included in a regression model.

PAGE 64

64 The seventh object ive sought to test the unidimensionality of Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scale. Principal component analysis (PCA) with orthogonal varimax rotation and the Kaiser criterion was utilized to test the unidimensionality of the M EPS. Agresti and F inlay (2009) identified PCA as an approach to identify patterns in data in order to emphasize similarities and differences in the dataset. Costello and Osborne (2005) said orthogonal varimax rotation is the most commonly used extraction method to refine a studys data structure into factor loadings. The loading of a variable on a factor is referred to as the correlation of the variable with the factor (Agresti & Finlay). Factor loadings range from .40 (low) to .70 (moderate) in social science research (Cost ello & Osborne). Communality is defined as the squared loadings for a variable that represents the proportion of its variability explained by factors (Agresti & Finlay, p. 533, 3). The Kaiser criterion produces all items with eigenvalues greater than one (Costello & Osborne). The eighth objective sought to understand effects of the combined attributes of motivation orientations and efficacy in instructional strategies on Master Gardener participation. Poisson regression was employed to measure the depende nt variables (Florida Master Gardener tenure) relationship to explanatory variables (demographic characteristics, instructional efficacy and motivational orientations). Agresti and Finlay (2009) said Poisson regression models are implemented to predict da ta counts (number of youth, number of telephone calls, etc.). A Poisson Poisson regression model assists the researcher by expressing the log outcome rate as a linear function of a set of predictors (McCullagh & Nelder, 1983). Since negative values correspond to

PAGE 65

65 expected counts between 0 and 1, there is no problem with negative predicted values due to the log of the expected count is modeled (McCullagh & Nelder).The re searcher utilized model Chi -Square and Deviance statistics as the model fit for the Poisson regression analysis (Mittlbck & Waldhr, 2000). The usage of regression models is assessed by the R or the coefficient of determination (Agresti & Finlay, 1997). Cohen (1998) reported an R of .001 signifies a weak relationship, an R of .009 signifies a moderate relationship, and an R of .025 represents a strong relationship. Agresti and Finlay indicated the coefficient of determination is the relative amount of data in the dependent variable that is described by the independent variable. This statistical procedure allows the researcher to weight two or more independent variables to generate the highest correlation with one dependent variable (Ary et al., 2006). These methods assist the researcher in avoiding errors in ex post facto designs (Ary et al.). Reliability by Instrument Construct Reliability levels for the internal scales of the pilot and formal study wer e calculated ex post facto ( Table 3 2). The inter nal consistency of items in a scale are measured by Cronbachs alpha coefficients (Cronbach, 1951). These coefficients are utilized to indicate each items reliability (Ary et al., 2006). Table 3 2 Reliability Levels of Internal Scales Internal Scale Pilot Study Formal Study Instructional Efficacy .94 .93 Professional Advancement .82 .70 Escape from Routine .81 .81 Competence related Curiosity .80 .76 Community Service .77 .84 Interpersonal Relations .76 .77 Exte rnal Influence .63 .79 Note: Reliability levels

PAGE 66

66 Chapter Summary The methods utilized in sampling the population and the statistical methods for analyzing data to address this studys objectives were described in this chapter. The survey instruments (Mergeners Education Participation Scale & Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale) were also described, and the validity and reliability of each. The data collection procedures were explained through the implemen tation of a mail survey, and addressing nonresponse error in this study was described. Descriptive statistics, correlations, and multiple regression statistics were employed to analyze data gathered by the M -EPS and TSES. The data analysis procedures were presented including descriptive statistics, t -tests, ANOVA (analysis of variance), correlation coefficients, and Poisson regression to predict the association of motivational orientations and instructional efficacy on Master Gardener tenure. Chapter 4 will present findings from the statistical analyses.

PAGE 67

67 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSI ON Introduction This chapter presents the results of the data analysis procedures that were described in Chapter 3. The findings are organized into the studys eight objectives The first section describes the characteristics of participants. The second section describes Master Gardeners efficacy in instructional strategies as volunteer educators. The third section describes the motivational orientations for adults participatin g in the Florida Cooperative Extension Master Gardener Program. The fourth section describes if significant differences existed between motivational orientations based on participant demographics. The fifth section describes if significant differences exis ted between efficacy in instructional strategies based on participant demographics. The sixth section describes any existing relationships between efficacy in instructional strategies and motivational orientations for adults participating in Master Gardene r. The seventh objective tests the unidimensionality of Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scale. The eigh th section explains the effects of the combined attributes of motivation orientations and efficacy in instructional strategies on Master Garden er participation. Objective 1: Findings The first objective of the study was to describe participant demographics ( Table 4 1) in the Florida Cooperative Extension Master Gardener Program. As reported in Table 4 1, 73.01 % of respondents were women and 92 .0 8 % of respondents were white. Eighty percent of respondents were 56 years of age or older. Also, 79.44 % of respondents had obtained at least an Associates Degree. As reported in Table 4 1, 85.12 % of respondents annual income tended to be $25,000 or more. Over 80% of respondents had participated in the program over two years. Fifty-seven

PAGE 68

68 percent of respondents lived in Florida for 21 years or longer, though, 88.12 % of respondents were not born in Florida. Table 4 1 summarizes the demographic characteristics of respondents. Table 4 1 Participant Demographics Characteristic f % Gender Female Male 387 143 73 26 Ethnicity African American Asian Hispanic Native American Pacific Islander White Other 9 8 12 4 0 488 7 2 2 2 1 0 92 1 Age 18 34 years old 35 45 years old 46 55 years old 56 65 years old 66 years or older 7 13 87 186 235 1 3 17 35 45 Education High School Diploma or Equivalent Associates Degree Bachelo rs Degree Masters Degree Doctoral Degree Professional Degree 113 96 162 111 15 31 21 18 31 21 3 6 Income $24,999 or less $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,000 $100,000 or more 71 142 117 66 72 15 30 25 14 15 Tenure in Master Gardener More than One Year 2 4 years 5 10 years 11 or more years 103 162 192 73 19 31 36 14 Lived in Florida 10 years or less 11 20 years 21 30 years 31 years and over 128 102 98 202 24 19 18 39 Born in Florida Yes No 65 463 12 88

PAGE 69

69 Objective 2: Findings The second objective of the study was to describe Master Gardeners efficacy in instructional strategies as volunteer educators. The overall mean for the construct was 6.27 (SD = 1.53). Table 4 2 illustrates the descriptive statistics for the instructional efficacy construct. Responses ranged from quite a bit ( M = 6.66, SD = 1.72) to some influence ( M = 5.80, SD = 2.10). The highest means occurred for the questions How well can you respond to difficult questions from your clients? ( M = 6.66, SD = 1.72) and To what extent can you craft good questions for your clients?( M = 6.58, SD = 1.79). The lowest mean was associated with the question How much can you gauge client compre hension of what you have taught? ( M =5.80, SD = 2.10). Table 4 2 Descriptive Statistics for the Instructional Efficacy Construct N M SD How well can you respond to difficult questions from your clients? 530 6.66 1.72 To what extent can you craft go od questions for your clients? 530 6.58 1.79 How much can you gauge client comprehension of what you have taught? 530 6.28 1.87 To what extent can you provide an alternative explanation or example when clients are confused? 530 6.24 1.80 How much can yo u do to adjust your information to the proper level for individual clients? 530 6.21 1.74 How well can you implement alternative strategies in your teaching? 530 6.11 1.74 How comfortable are you using evaluation strategies? 530 5.80 2.10 Note: Overall M = 6.27 SD = 1.53 Scale: 9 = a great deal 7 = quite a bit 5 = some influence 3 = very little 1 = nothing Objective 3: Findings The third objective was to describe the motivational orientation for adults to participate in Master Gardener. Motivati onal orientations were: (a) Competence related curiosity, (b) Interpersonal relations, (c) Community service, (d) Professional advancement, (e) Compliance

PAGE 70

70 with external influences, and (f) Escape from routine. Competence related Curiosity was perceived to have much influence ( M = 4.35, SD = .63) on adult participation in MG. Community Service was perceived to have moderate influence ( M = 3.22, SD = .97), and Interpersonal Relations was perceived to have little influence ( M = 2.74, SD = .79). Escape from Rou tine ( M = 1.87, SD = .90), External Influence ( M = 1.32, SD = .63), and Professional Advancement ( M = 1.20, SD = .53) were perceived to have no influence on adult participation. Table 4 3 illustrates the overall means for each construct. Table 4 3 Overa ll Means for Each Construct Construct N M SD Competence related Curiosity 530 4.35 .63 Community Service 530 3.22 .97 Interpersonal Relations 530 2.74 .79 Escape from Routine 530 1.87 .90 External Influence 530 1.32 .63 Professional Advancement 530 1 .20 .53 Scale: 5 = very much influence, 4 = much influence 3 = moderate influence 2 = little influence 1 = no influence Competence related Curiosity Overall, respondents tended to perceive the Competence related Curiosity construct as having much inf luence ( M = 4.35, SD = .63). Respondents tended to rate the five items associated with the Competence related Curiosity cons truct as having much influence (Table 4 4). Table 4 4 Descriptive Statistics for the Competence related Curiosity Construct N M SD To Feed an Appetite for Knowledge 530 4.48 .75 To Satisfy Intellectual Curiosity 530 4.47 .82 To Satisfy an Inquiring Mind 530 4.42 .79 To Obtain Practical Benefit 530 4.37 .92 To Seek Knowledge for its Own Sake 531 4.01 1.14 Note: Overall M = 4 .35 SD = .63 Scale: 5 = very much influence, 4 = much influence, 3 = moderate influence, 2 = little influence, 1 = no influence. Adults believed to feed an appetite for knowledge ( M = 4.48, SD = .75), to satisfy an intellectual curiosity ( M = 4.47, SD = .82), to satisfy an inquiring mind ( M = 4.42, SD = .79),

PAGE 71

71 to obtain a practical benefit ( M = 4.37, SD = .92), and to seek knowledge for its own sake?( M = 4.01, SD = 1.14) had much influence on their decision to participate in the MG Program. Tabl e 4 3 summarizes the descriptive statistics for the Competence related Curiosity construct. Community Service Overall, respondents tended to perceive the Community Service construct as having moderate influence ( M = 3.22, SD = .97). Responses for the five items associated with the Community Service construct ranged from moderate influence to little influence. Respondents reported to be a more effective citizen ( M = 3.58, SD = 1.23), to improve my community work ( M = 3.55, SD = 1.22), and to improve their ability to serve mankind ( M = 3.51, SD = 1.24) were moderate influences on their participation. Adults believed to gain insight into human relationships ( M = 2.26, SD = 1.25) had little influ ence on their participation ( Table 4 5). Table 4 5 Descriptive Statistics for the Community Service Construct N M SD To Be a More Effective Citizen 531 3.58 1.23 To Improve My Community Work 531 3.55 1.22 To Improve My Ability to Serve Mankind 530 3.51 1.24 To Prepare for Community Service 531 3.2 5 1.33 To Gain Insight into Human Relationships 531 2.26 1.25 Note: Overall M = 3.22, SD = .97. Scale: 5 = very much influence, 4 = much influence 3 = moderate influence 2 = little influence 1 = no influence Interpersonal Relations Overall, responde nts tended to perceive the Interpersonal Relations construct as having little influence ( M = 2.74, SD = .79). Responses for the seven items associated with the Interpersonal Relations construct ranged from moderate influence to little influence. Respon dents reported to respond to the fact that I am surrounded by people who continue to learn ( M = 3.70, SD = 1.23) and to share a common interest with someone else ( M = 3.64, SD

PAGE 72

72 = 1.23) had much influence on their MG Program participation. Adults reporte d to maintain or improve my social position ( M = 1.32, SD = .73) had no influence on their participation ( Table 4 6). Table 4 6 Descriptive Statistics for the Interpersonal Relations Construct N M SD To Respond to the Fact that I am Surrounded by Peo ple Who Continue to Learn 530 3.70 1.23 To Share a Common Interest with Someone Else 530 3.64 1.23 To Participate in Group Activities 530 3.16 1.24 To Become Acquainted with Congenial People 530 3.02 1.21 To Fulfill a Need for Personal Associations 531 2.57 1.24 To Take Part in an Activity Which is Customary in the Circles in Which I Move 531 2.15 1.25 To Improve Social Relationships 531 2.04 1.17 To be Accepted by Others 530 1.77 1.05 To Comply with the Fact that People with Status and Attend Adu lt Education Classes 530 1.68 1.05 To Maintain or Improve My Social Position 530 1.32 .73 Note: Overall M = 2.74, SD = .79. Scale: 5 = very much influence, 4 = much influence 3 = moderate influence 2 = little influence 1 = no influence Escape from R outine Overall, respondents tended to perceive the Escape from Routine construct as having no influence ( M = 1.87, SD = .90). Respondents tended to rate the four items associated with the Escape from Routine construct as having little influence. Responde nts reported to provide a contrast to the rest of my life ( M = 2.21, SD = 1.19), to get a break from the routine of home or work ( M = 1.93, SD = 1.159), to have a few hours away from responsibilities ( M = 1.66, SD = 1.08), and to gain relief from bo redom ( M = 1.66, SD = 1.07) had little influence on their parti cipation in the MG Program ( Table 4 7). Table 4 7 Descriptive Statistics for the Escape from Routine Construct N M SD To Provide a Contrast to the Rest of My Life 531 2.21 1.19 To Get a Break from Routine of Home or Work 531 1.93 1.15 To Have a Few Hours Away from Responsibilities 531 1.66 1.08 To Gain Relief from Boredom 530 1.66 1.07 Note: Overall M = 1.87, SD = .90. Scale: 5 = very much influence, 4 = much influence 3 = moderate i nfluence 2 = little influence 1 = no influence

PAGE 73

73 External Influence Overall, respondents tended to perceive the External Influence construct as having no influence ( M = 1.32, SD = .63). Respondents tended to rate the four items associated with the Externa l Influence construct as having no influence. Respondents reported to comply with recommendations from someone else ( M = 1.47, SD = .95), to carry out the recommendations from some authority ( M = 1.37, SD = .88), to fulfill my professional obligatio n ( M = 1.26, SD = .76), and to fulfill the requirements of a government agency ( M = 1.16, SD = .62) had no influe nce on their participation ( Table 4 8). Table 4 8 Descriptive Statistics for the External Influence Construct N M SD To Comply with Rec ommendations from Someone Else 530 1.47 .95 To Carry Out the Recommendations from Some Authority 531 1.37 .88 To Fulfill My Professional Obligation 531 1.26 .76 To Fulfill Requirements of a Government Agency 530 1.16 .62 Note: Overall M = 1.32, SD = .63. Scale: 5 = very much influence, 4 = much influence 3 = moderate influence 2 = little influence 1 = no influence Professional Advancement Overall, respondents tended to perceive the Professional Advancement construct as having no influence ( M = 1 .20, SD = .53). Respondents tended to rate the three items associated with the Professional Advancement construct as having no influence. Respondents reported to secure professional advancement ( M = 1.27, SD = .674), to give me a higher status on the job ( M = 1.20, SD = .70), and to comply with my employers policy ( M = 1.13, SD = .59) had no influence on their parti cipation in the MG Program Respondents may have indicated Professional Advancement had no influence due to the vast majority of partic ipants were over 55 years old. The studys fin dings of the descriptive s tatistics for the Professional A dvancement construct toward this adult audience are illustrated in Table 4 9 .

PAGE 74

74 Ta ble 4 9 Descriptive Statistics for the Professional Advancement Const ruct N M SD To Secure Professional Advancement 530 1.27 .74 To Give Me Higher Status on the Job 531 1.20 .70 To Comply with My Employers Policy 530 1.13 .59 Note: Overall M = 1.20, SD = .53. Scale: 5 = very much influence, 4 = much influence 3 = mod erate influence 2 = little influence 1 = no influence Objective Four: Findings The studys fourth objective was to determine if significant differences existed between efficacy in instructional strategies based on participant demographics (gender, age race, education, income, length of Master Gardener tenure, length of Florida residence, state of birth). There was no significant difference in gender and instructional efficacy (Table 4 10). Table 4 10. Independent Samples t test for Gender and Instructional Efficacy Gender n M SD F p Male 143 6.26 1.48 .03 .86 Female 384 6.28 1.52 There was no significant difference in age and instructional efficacy. Table 411 illustrates the results. Table 4 11. Analysis of Variance for Age and Instr uctional Efficacy Age n M SD F p 18 45 years old 20 6.05 1.20 .94 .42 46 55 years old 86 6.30 1.83 56 65 years old 184 6.40 1.39 66 years old and over 235 6.18 1.48 There was a significant difference in education, F (4, 520) = 5.55, p < .05. The effect size was negligible ( = .04). Education accounts for 4% of the variance inefficacy. Tukeys post hoc analysis was conducted to determine if differences existed in levels of education. There was a significant difference ( p < .05) from respondents who had earned a high school diploma ( M = 6.09, SD = 1.42) and those who had earned a Masters Degree ( M = 6.69, SD = 1.41). Also, there was a significant difference ( p < .05) from respondents who had earned an Associates Degree (M = 5.83, SD = 1.56) and those who had earned a Master s Degree ( M = 6.69, SD = 1.41), and

PAGE 75

75 respondents who had earned an Associates Degree ( M = 5.83, SD = 1.56) and those who had earned a Doctoral/Professional Degree ( M = 6.65, SD = 1.71). Table 4 12. Analysis of Variance for Education and Instructional Ef ficacy Education n M SD F p High School Diploma 113 6.09 1.42 5.55* .00 Associates Degree 96 5.83 1.56 Bachelors Degree 161 6.28 1.45 Masters Degree 110 6.69 1.41 Doctoral/Professional Degree 45 6.65 1.71 Note: *p < .01. There was no significant difference in income and instructional efficacy. Table 4 13 illustrates the results. Table 4 13. Analysis of Variance for Income and Instructional Efficacy Income n M SD F p 24,999 or less 71 5.88 1.29 2.07 .07 25,00 0 49,999 141 6.23 1.55 50,000 74,999 116 6.38 1.44 75,000 99,999 64 6.48 1.71 100,000 or more 73 6.61 1.54 There was no significant difference in race and instructional efficacy. Table 4 14 illustrates the results. Table 4 1 4 Independent Samples t test for Race and Instructional Efficacy Race n M SD F p White 488 6.27 1.50 .01 .91 Non white 40 6.30 1.60 There was no significant difference in Master Gardener tenure and instructional efficacy. Table 4 15 illus trates the results. Table 4 15. Analysis of Variance for Master Gardener Tenure and Instructional Efficacy Tenure n M SD F p More than One Year 103 5.85 1.20 1.12 .32 2 4 years 162 6.36 1.38 5 10 years 173 6.48 1.25 11 or more years 92 6.66 1.77 There was no significant difference in length of Florida residence and instructional efficacy. Table 4 16 illustrates the results.

PAGE 76

76 Table 4 16. Analysis of Variance for Length of Florida Residence and Instructional Efficacy Lived in Florida n M SD F p 10 years or less 128 6.64 1.86 .78 .91 11 20 years 102 6.60 1.93 21 30 years 98 6.11 1.18 31 or more years 202 6.13 1.41 There was no significant difference in place of birth and instructional efficacy. Table 4 17 illustrates the results. Table 4 17. Independent Samples t test for Born in Florida and Instructional Efficacy Born in Florida n M SD F p Yes 65 6.19 1,42 2.05 .11 No 462 6.28 1.51 Objective Five The studys fifth objective was t o determine if significant differences existed between motivational orientations (Competency related Curiosity, Interpersonal Relations, Community Service, Escape from Routine, Professional Advancement, and Compliance with External Influence) based on part icipant demographics (gender, age, race, education, income, length of Master Gardener tenure, length of Florida residence, and place of birth). Gender There was a significant difference in respondents motivational orientations by gender. There was a sign ificant difference for the Competence related Curiosity construct by gender, t (529) = 3.69, p < .05, with women having significantly higher means than men. The effect size was small ( d = .38). There was a significant difference for gender, t (529) = 2.70, p < .05, with men ( M = 1.46, SD = .79) receiving higher means than women ( M = 1.27, SD = .56) for External Influence. The effect size was small ( d = .28). There was a significant effect for gender, t (529) = 1.70, p < .05, with men ( M = 1.27, SD = .57) r eceiving higher means than women ( M = 1.18, SD = .52) for Professional Advancement. The effect size was small ( d = .17). There were no other significant differences between respondents motivational orient ations by gender ( Table 4 18).

PAGE 77

77 Table 4 18. Indepen dent Samples t test for Gender and Motivational Orientations Constructs n M SD t p Competence related Curiosity Male 143 4.17 .71 3.69* .00 Female 387 4.42 .59 Community Service Male Female 143 386 3.14 3.26 1.00 .95 1.33 .19 Interpersonal Relations Male Female 143 386 2.73 2.75 .82 .79 .21 .84 Escape from Routine Male Female 143 387 1.91 1.86 .87 .91 .62 .36 External Influence Male Female 142 386 1.46 1.27 .79 .56 2.70* .01 P rofessional Advancement Male Female 143 386 1.27 1.18 .57 .52 1.70* .02 Note: p < .01. Age Respondents signific antly differed in their motiva tional orientations by age ( Table 4 19). Due to a small number of respondents in the age 18 35 years old and the 36 45 years old categories, both groups were merged to create the 18 45 years old category. Explain your age groupings since you combined some age ranges. There was a significant difference for Competence related Curiosity by age, F (3, 524) = 3.81, ( p < .05). The effect size was negligible ( = .02). Age accounts for 2% of the variance in Competence related Curiosity as a motivational orientation. Tukeys post hoc analysis was conducted to determine if differences existed in respondents age. There was a significant difference ( p < .05) from respondents who were 56 65 years old ( M = 4.45, SD = .54) and those who were age 66 or over ( M = 4.27, SD = .66). There was a significant difference in age, F (3, 523) = 2.93, p < .05, for Community Service. The effect size was negligible ( = .17). A ge accounts for 1.70% of the variance in

PAGE 78

78 Community Service as a motivational orientation. Tukeys post hoc analysis was conducted to determine if differences existed in age. Also, there was a significant difference ( p < .05) from respondents who were 46 56 years old ( M = 2.96, SD = .95) and those who were 56 65 years old ( M = 3.30, SD = .92). There was a significant difference ( p < .05) from respondents who were 46 56 years old ( M = 2.96, SD = .95) and those who were age 66 or over ( M = 3.29, SD = .97 ). There was a significant difference in age, F (3, 523) = 6.95, p < .05, for Interpersonal Relations. The effect size was negligible ( = .38). Age accounts for 3.80% of the variance in Interpersonal Relations as a motivational orientation. Tukeys pos t hoc analysis was conducted to determine if differences existed in age. There was a significant difference ( p < .05) from respondents who were 46 56 years old ( M = 2.40, SD = .76) and those who were ages 56 65 (M = 2.82, SD = .77). There was a signifi cant difference ( p < .05) from respondents who were 46 56 years old ( M = 2.40, SD = .76) and those who were age 66 or over ( M = 2.82, SD = .78). There was a significant difference in age, F (3, 524) = 4.15, p < .05, for External Influence. The effect si ze was negligible ( = .23). Age accounts for 2.30% of the variance in External Influence as a motivational orientation. Tukeys post hoc analysis was conducted to determine if differences existed in age. There was a significant difference ( p < .05) from respondents who were 56 65 years old ( M = 1.24, SD = .50) and those who were ages 66 or over ( M = 1.41, SD = .75). There was a significant difference in age, F (3, 523) = 3.65, p < .05, for Professional Advancement. The effect size was negligible ( = 20). Age accounts for 2.0% of the variance in Professional Advancement as a motivational orientation. Tukeys post hoc analysis was conducted to determine if differences existed in age. There were no significant differences. Table 4 19 illustrates the fin dings for the ANOVA for age and motivational orientations.

PAGE 79

79 Table 4 19. Analysis of Variance for Age and Motivational Orientations Learning Orientations n M SD F p Competence related Curiosity 18 45 years old 46 55 years old 56 6 5 years old 66 years old and over 20 87 186 235 4.15 4.43 4.45 4.27 .74 .66 .54 .66 3.81* .01 Community Service 18 45 years old 46 55 years old 56 65 years old 66 years old and over 20 87 186 235 3.16 2.96 3.30 3.29 1.07 95 .92 .97 2.93* .03 Interpersonal Relations 18 45 years old 46 55 years old 56 65 years old 66 years old and over 20 87 186 235 2.72 2.40 2.82 2.82 .90 .76 .77 .78 6.95** .00 Escape from Routine 18 45 years old 46 55 years old 56 65 years old 66 years old and over 20 87 186 235 2.06 1.88 1.81 1.90 1.07 .95 .83 .92 .66 .58 External Influence 18 45 years old 46 55 years old 56 65 years old 66 years old and over 20 87 186 2 35 1.49 1.21 1.24 1.41 .75 .46 .50 .75 4.15* .01 Professional Advancement 18 45 years old 46 55 years old 56 65 years old 66 years old and over 20 87 186 235 1.45 1.31 1.14 1.20 .74 .74 .38 .53 3.65* .01 Note: p < .05. ** p < .01. Education There was a significant difference in education F (4, 521) = 6.10, p < .05, for External Influence ( Table 4 20). The effect size was negligible ( = .44). Education accounts for 4.40% of the variance in External Influence as a motivationa l orientation. Tukeys post hoc analysis was conducted to determine if differences existed in education levels. There were no significant differences. The results of the ANOVA for education and motivational orientations are illustrated in Table 4 20.

PAGE 80

80 Tabl e 4 20. Analysis of Variance for Education and Motivational Orientations Constructs n M SD F p Competence related Curiosity High School Diploma Associates Degree Bachelors Degree Masters Degree Doctoral/Professional De gree 113 96 162 110 46 4.30 4.34 4.33 4.41 4.43 .66 .65 .64 .56 .61 .65 .63 Community Service High School Diploma Associates Degree Bachelors Degree Masters Degree Doctoral/Professional Degree 113 96 162 110 46 3.37 3.19 3.21 3.15 3.24 .91 1.00 .96 .96 .98 .82 .52 Interpersonal Relations High School Diploma Associates Degree Bachelors Degree Masters Degree Doctoral/Professional Degree 113 96 162 110 46 2.86 2.83 2.70 2.74 2.52 .85 .83 .73 .76 .77 1.95 .10 Escape from Routine High School Diploma Associates Degree Bachelors Degree Masters Degree Doctoral/Professional Degree 113 96 162 110 46 1.02 1.88 1.82 1.83 1.82 .96 .92 .81 .89 .86 .79 .53 External In fluence High School Diploma Associates Degree Bachelors Degree Masters Degree Doctoral/Professional Degree 113 96 162 110 46 1.56 1.33 1.26 1.20 1.21 .88 .67 .54 .38 .43 6.10* .00 Professional Advancement High School Diploma Associates Degree Bachelors Degree Masters Degree Doctoral/Professional Degree 113 96 162 110 46 1.33 1.19 1.19 1.15 1.12 .73 .52 .47 .42 .41 2.16 .07 Note: p < .01.

PAGE 81

81 Income There was a significant difference in inco me, F (5, 460) = 4.25, p < 05, for External Influence ( Table 4 21). The effect size was negligible ( = .44). Income accounts for 4.40% of the variance in External Influence as a motivational orientation. Tukeys post hoc analysis was conducted to determine if differences existed in income levels. There were no significant differences. There was a signi ficant difference in income, F (5, 461) = 3.01, p < .05, for Professional Advancement. The effect size was negligible ( = .32). Income accounts for 3.20% of the variance in Professional Advancement as a motivational orientation. Tukeys post hoc analysis was conducted to determine if differences existed in respondents income. There were no other significant differences between income levels and motivational orientations. Table 4 21. Analysis of Variance for Income and Motivational Orientations Construc ts n M SD F p Competence related Curiosity 24,999 or less 25,000 49,999 50,000 74,999 75,000 99,999 100,000 or more 71 142 117 65 73 4.38 4.29 4.35 4.49 4.50 .74 .64 .64 .52 .52 1.94 .09 Community Service 24,999 or less 25,000 49,999 50,000 74,999 75,000 99,999 100,000 or more 71 142 117 65 73 3.24 3.28 3.26 3.41 3.14 .92 .99 .92 .97 .98 .78 .56 Interpersonal Relations 24,999 or less 25,000 49,999 50,000 74,999 75 ,000 99,999 100,000 or more 71 142 117 65 73 2.81 2.86 2.70 2.79 2.75 .77 .87 .75 .77 .75 .97 .44 Escape from Routine 24,999 or less 25,000 49,999 50,000 74,999 75,000 99,999 100,000 or more 71 142 117 65 73 1.93 2.0 0 1.85 1.90 1.88 .95 1.01 .79 1.00 .88 .48 .79 External Influence 24,999 or less 71 1.42 .72 4.25** .00 25,000 49,999 142 1.49 .79

PAGE 82

82 Table 4 21. Continued Constructs n M SD F p Competence related Curiosity 50,000 74,9 99 117 1.25 .53 75,000 99,999 65 1.21 .56 100,000 or more 73 1.14 .33 Professional Advancement 24,999 or less 25,000 49,999 50,000 74,999 75,000 99,999 100,000 or more 71 142 117 65 73 1.24 1.33 1.17 1.14 1. 05 .64 .64 .49 .49 .21 3.01* .01 Note:* p < .05. ** p < .01. Race There was a significant difference in race, t (525) = 2.80, p < .05, with nonwhites ( M = 3.63, SD = .92) having higher means than whites ( M = 3.20, SD = .95) for Community Service. Th ere was a medium effect size ( d = .46). There was a significant difference in race, t (5, 461) = 7.17, p < .05, with non-whites ( M = 1.58, SD = .75) having higher means than whites ( M = 1.30, SD = .62) for External Infl uence ( Table 4 22). The effect size w as medium ( d = .41). There were no other significant differences between race and motivational orientations. Table 4 22. Independent Samples t test for Race and Motivational Orientations n M SD F p Competence related Curiosity White 488 4.36 63 .33 .57 Non white 40 4.30 .65 Community Service White 488 3.20 .95 2.80** .00 Non white 40 3.63 .92 Interpersonal Relations White 488 2.74 .79. .61 .55 Non white 40 2.82 .85 Escape from Routine Whi te 488 1.87 .90 .24 .81 Non white 40 1.84 .92 External Influence White 488 1.30 .62 2.28* .03 Non white 40 1.58 .75 Professional Advancement White 488 1.19 .53 1.69 .10 Non white 40 1.35 .57 Note: p < .05. ** p < .01.

PAGE 83

83 Master Gardener Tenure There was a significant difference in Master Gardener tenure, F (3, 526) = 2.96, p < .05, for Interpersonal Relations. The effect size was negligible ( = .16). Master Gardener tenure accounts for 1.60% of the variance in Interpersonal Relations as a motivational orientation. Tukeys post hoc analysis was conducted to determine if differences existed in income levels. There were no significant differenc es. There were no significant differences among Master Gardener tenure and any other motiv ational orientations. Table 4 23 illustrates these findings. Table 4 23. Analysis of Variance for Master Gardener Tenure and Motivational Orientations n M SD F p Competence related Curiosity 2 years or less 162 4.40 .68 .68 .56 3 5 years 155 4.30 .61 6 10 years 140 4.36 .63 11 years or more 73 4.33 .59 Community Service 2 years or less 162 3.21 .96 .09 .97 3 5 yea rs 155 3.21 .96 6 10 years 140 3.21 .91 11 years or more 73 3.27 1.08 Interpersonal Relations 2 years or less 162 2.65 .81 2.96* .03 3 5 years 155 2.76 .73 6 10 years 140 2.73 .78 11 years or more 73 2.97 .86 Escape from Routine 2 years or less 162 1.81 .84 2.18 .09 3 5 years 155 1.82 .87 6 10 years 140 1.87 .84 11 years or more 73 2.11 1.14 External Influence 2 years or less 162 1.29 .59 2.06 .10 3 5 years 155 1.28 .57 6 10 years 140 1.30 .56 11 years or more 73 1.49 .90 Professional Advancement 2 years or less 162 1.24 .63 2.32 .08 3 5 years 155 1.16 .45 6 10 years 140 1.15 .45 11 years or more 73 1.32 .59 Note: p < .05.

PAGE 84

84 Length of Residence There was a significant difference in length of Florida residency, F (72, 454) = 7.17, p < .05, for External Influence. The effect size was negligible ( = .25). Length of residence accounts for 2.50% of the variance in External Influence as a motivational orientation. Tukeys post hoc analysis was conducted to determine if differences existed in residence categories. There was a significant difference ( p < .05) from respondents who had lived in Florida 11 20 years ( M = 1.42, SD = .76) and those who had lived in Florida 31 or more years ( M = 1.23, SD = .42). There was a significant difference ( p < .05) from respondents who had lived in Florida 21 30 y ears ( M = 1.46, SD = .81) and those who had lived in Florida 31 or more years ( M = 1.23, SD = .42). Table 4 24 illustrates these findings. There were no other significant differences between length of Florida residence and motivational orientations. Table 4 24. Analysis of Variance for Length of Florida Residence and Motivational Orientations n M SD F p Competence related Curiosity 10 years or less 132 4.35 .63 .40 .76 11 20 years 105 4.30 .68 21 30 years 97 4.40 .68 31 o r more years 194 4.35 .59 Community Service 10 years or less 132 3.32 .95 .61 .61 11 20 years 105 3.18 1.01 21 30 years 97 3.23 .91 31 or more years 194 3.19 .97 Interpersonal Relations 10 years or less 132 2.76 .81 .85 .47 11 20 years 105 2.69 .81 21 30 years 97 2.85 .83 31 or more years 194 2.71 75. Escape from Routine 10 years or less 132 1.77 .85 2.30 .08 11 20 years 105 1.94 .91 21 30 years 97 2.04 1. 00 31 or more years 194 1.81 .86 External Influence 10 years or less 132 1.26 .59 4.53* .01 11 20 years 105 1.42 .76 21 30 years 97 1.46 .81 31 or more years 194 1.23 .42

PAGE 85

85 Table 4 24. Continued n M SD F p Competence related Curiosity Professional Advancement 10 years or less 132 1.18 .56 1.94 .12 11 20 years 105 1.26 .61 21 30 years 97 1.28 .65 31 or more years 194 1.15 .38 Note: p < .05. Florida Native or Not There were no significant differences between respondents born in Florida versus respondents that were not and motivational orientations. Table 4 25 illustrates these findings. Table 4 25. Independent Samples t test for Place of Birth and Motivational Orientations n M SD F p Competence related Curiosity Florida 65 4.37 .51 .46 .71 Other 462 4.35 .65 Community Service Florida 65 3.33 .92 1.65 .18 Other 462 3.21 .97 Interpersonal Relations Florida 65 2.77 .68 1.77 .15 Other 462 2.74 .81 Escape from Routine Florida 65 1.94 .91 1.13 .34 Other 462 1.85 .90 External Influence Florida 65 1.26 .49 .99 .40 Other 462 1.32 .65 Professional Advancement Florida 65 1.18 .45 1.66 .19 Other 462 1.20 .54 Objective Six The studys sixth objective was to describe any existing relationships between respondents efficacy in instructional strategies and motivational orientations (a) Competence related Curiosity, (b) Community Service, (c) Interpersonal Relations, (d) Escape from Routine, (e) External Influence, and (f) Professional Advancement.

PAGE 86

86 Competence related Curiosity and Instructional Efficacy exhibited a significant low positive relationship, r (525) = .23, p < .05 ( Table 4 26). A significant low positive association existed between Community Service and Instructional Efficacy, r (525) = .25, p < .05. Interpersonal Relations and Instructional Efficacy exhibited a significant negligible positive association, r (525) = .09, p < .05. No other significant relationships existed. Table 4 26. Correlations between Motivational Orientations and Instructional Efficacy Instructional Efficacy Motivational Orientations r p Magnitude Competence related Curiosity .23* 00 Low Community Service .25* .00 Low Interpersonal Relations .09* .03 Negligible Escape from Routine .00 .93 Very Strong External Influence .01 .90 Negligible Professional Advancement .01 .87 Negligible Note Magnitude: .01 r ble, .10 r r Moderate, .50 r r p < .05. Objective Seven: Findings The studys seventh objective was to test the unidimensionality of Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scal e. Initially, the factorability of the 41 M EPS items was examined. Responses to the 41 items on the M EPS were factor analyzed by the method of principal component analysis and then rotated to achieve orthogonal and oblique structure according to t he vari max criteria of Babbie ( 2007). Factor loadings of .43 or more were consi dered acceptable (Table 4 27). Certain items loaded on separate constructs than Mergener (1979) reported in the M EPS. To account for the new and altered constructs, the new constru cts were labeled with different names. Competence related Curiosity became Learning, Interpersonal Relations became Socialization, Escape from Routine became Vary Routine, and Professional Development and External Influence were combined to form Pro fessional Enhancement. Community Service

PAGE 87

87 remained Community Service. A new construct was formed (Others Perceptions). Six items were dropped from the analysis due to the inability of forming the items into two separate constructs. Six items loaded on t he Learning construct and items ranged from .82 to .45 ( Table 4 27). Five items loaded on the Community Service construct ranging from .78 to .43 and five items loaded on the Socialization construct ranging from .76 to .56. Seven items loaded on the Vary Routine construct and items ranged from .79 to .50. Eight items loaded on the Professional Enhancement construct and items ranged from .80 to .45. Four items loaded on the Others Perceptions construct and items ranged from .65 to .51. Items loading on two separate constructs ranged from .66 to .42. Table 4 27. Partition of Variance among Factors in Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scale Constructs Factor Loadings Competence related Curiosity (Learning) To Feed an Appetite for Knowledge .82 To Satisfy an Inquiring Mind .81 To Satisfy Intellectual Curiosity .75 To Seek Knowledge for its Own Sake .64 To Obtain Practical Benefit .46 To Respond to the Fact that I am Surrounded by People Who Continue to Learn .45 Commu nity Service To Improve My Ability to Serve Mankind .78 To Prepare for Community Service .76 To Be a More Effective Citizen .74 To Improve My Community Work .70 To Comply with the Ethics of the Horticulture Industry .43 Interpe rsonal Relations (Socialization) To Participate in Group Activities .76 To Become Acquainted with Congenial People .74 To Share a Common Interest with Someone Else .69 To Fulfill a Need for Personal Associations .66 To Improve So cial Relationships .56 Escape from Routine (Vary Routine) To Get a Break from Routine of Home or Work .79 To Gain Relief from Boredom .70 To Provide a Contrast to the Rest of My Life .66 To Have a Few Hours Away from Responsibilitie s .62 To Stop Myself from Becoming Stagnant .55

PAGE 88

88 Table 4 27. Continued Constructs Factor Loadings Escape from Routine (Vary Routine) To Provide Contrast to My Previous Education .51 To Escape the Intellectual Narrowness of My Occupatio n .50 Professional Development & External Influence (Professional Enhancement) To Give Me Higher Status on the Job .80 To Secure Professional Advancement .78 To Fulfill My Professional Obligation .69 To Fulfill Requirements of a Gov ernment Agency .64 To Help Me Earn a Degree, Diploma or Certificate .62 To Maintain or Improve My Social Position .61 To Carry Out the Recommendations from Some Authority .58 To Comply with My Employers Policy .45 Others Perceptions To Comply with the Fact that People with Status and Prestige Attend Adult .65 Education Classes To Take Part in an Activity which is Customary in the Circles in which I Move .59 To Be Accepted by Others .57 To Gain Insigh t into Human Relationships .51 Items Loaded into a Separate Construct To Comply with Recommendations from Someone Else .66 To Keep Up with Others .60 To Supplement a Previous Narrow Education .54 Items Loaded into a Separate Construct To Clarify What I Want to Be Doing 5 Years from Now .58 To Overcome the Frustrations of Day to Day Gardening .51 To Acquire Knowledge that Will Help with Other Courses .42 Objective Eight: Findings The eighth objective was to understand eff ects of the combined attributes of demographic characteristics, motivational orientations, and efficacy in instructional strategies on Master Gardener tenure. Poisson regression was used to assess the net effect of each measure of demographic characteristi cs, motivational orientations, and instructional efficacy on MG tenure. The Poisson regression model was significant and indicated a good fit, with x (1, N = 465) = 4.96, p < .05. Age was the only demographic characteristic that proved significant p < .0 5. Instructional efficacy was significant on MG tenure as well p < .05 ( Table 4 28). As age increased one unit, Master Gardener tenure increased .23. As instructional efficacy increased one unit, Master

PAGE 89

89 Gardener tenure increased .12. Learning, Social, Vary Routine, and Others Perceptions were the motivational orientations found significant on MG tenure p < .05. However as Learning and Socialization increased, MG tenure decreased. As Learning increased one unit, Master Gardener tenure decreased -.10. When S ocialization increased one unit, Master Gardener tenure decreased .10. As Vary Routine increased one unit, Master Gardener tenure increased .09. As Others Perceptions increased one unit, Master Gardener tenure increased .14. A Poisson regression model co regression model for this study was illustrated as: Master Gardner tenure = .16 + .23 Age + .12 Instructional Efficacy + ( -.10) Learning + ( -.10) Socialization + .09 Vary Rout ine + .14 Others Perceptions. The researcher tested for interactions among demographic characteristics, motivational orientations, and instructional efficacy in the Poisson model. Age was identified as the sole demographic characteristic that produced a significant interaction ( p < .05) with other items. The model provided further support that respondents were more likely to continue participating in MG when they possessed instructional efficacy. There was a significant interaction ( p < .05) with age and instructional efficacy on MG tenure. For these data, the expected log count for each unit of instructional efficacy and age increased, MG tenure increased .03. Certain motivational orientations produced significant interactions ( p < .05) with age as well. As one unit of Community Service and age increased, MG tenure decreased -.02. When Others Perceptions and age increased, a unit of MG tenure increased .03. As each unit of Vary Routine and age increase d, MG tenure increased .02 ( Table 4 29). Table 4 28. Summary of Poisson Regression Analysis of Master Gardener Tenure on Demographic Characteristics, Motivational Orientations and Instructional Efficacy N B SE B p Intercept 465 .16 .21 Gender 465 .05 .05 .29

PAGE 90

90 Table 4 28. Continu ed N B SE B p Rac e 465 .02 .08 .79 Age 465 .23 .03 .00* Income 465 .02 .02 .18 Education 465 .00 .02 .96 Instructional Efficacy 465 .12 .02 .00* Learning 465 .10 .04 .01* Community Service 465 .03 .03 .34 Socialization 465 .10 .03 .00* Vary Routine 465 .09 .03 .0 1* Professional Enhancement 465 .06 .05 .25 Others Perceptions 465 .14 .03 .00* Instructional Efficacy**Age 465 .03 .00 .00* Learning**Age 465 .01 .01 .34 Socialization**Age 465 .01 .01 .30 Community Service**Age 465 .02 .01 .00* Vary Routine**A ge 465 .02 .01 .01* Professional Enhancement**Age 465 .01 .01 .37 Others Perceptions**Age 465 .03 .01 .00* Note: *p < .05. ** = test for significant interaction Summary This chapter included the findings from objectives of the study. The findings we re produc ed from descriptive statistics, ttests, ANOVAs, principal component analysis, and Poisson regression. Chapter 5 will present the studys conclusions, implications, recommendations for research, and recommendations for practice.

PAGE 91

91 CHAPTER 5 CO NCLUSIONS, IMPLICATI ONS AND RECOMMENDATI ONS This chapter includes the summary of the research findings from the study. Chapter 5 includes a summary of the conclusions, implications, and future recommendations for research and future recommendations for pr actice. Summary of the Study According to Schrock et al. (1999), demographic characteristics alone cannot be used to predict prolonged participation in the Master Gardener program. More rigorous research is needed to learn why adults continuously participate in Master Gardener. Developing a comprehension of characteristics of the volunteer team (Master Gardener participants) in a state by state basis is needed due to the lack of a standard national Master Gardener program (Kirsch & VanDerZanden, 2002). Ext ension should utilize trained Master Gardeners in as many volunteer opportunities as possible for several years in order to get a good return on their investment (Meyer & Hanchek, 1997; Swackhamer & Kiernan, 2005). National statistics have revealed that on the average, one out of three volunteers in any given organization discontinue volunteering after one year of service (Corporation for National and Community Service, 2006). Schrock et al. (2000) recommended keeping quality Master Gardeners is a method to decrease the cost of the program, and increase the effectiveness of Extension in terms of service delivery. Volunteers are essential elements to any organization relying on volunteers. Rost (1997) said volunteers cooperate with organizations with shared interests. A straightforward explanation does not exist as to what motivates adults to volunteer for the Master Gardener program (Flagler, 1992). With a total value of Florida Master Gardener volunteer hours in 2007 worth approximately $8,000,000, it is cr ucial that University of Florida Extension personnel as well as the horticulture industry understand why Master Gardener participants are electing to become

PAGE 92

92 active or inactive in the program (L. Arrington, personal communication, June 1, 2008). Many Flori da communities rely upon Master Gardeners to assist them with projects, as well for educational horticulture advice, and therefore would benefit from an increase in the retention rate among this generous group of individuals (T. Wichman, personal communica tion, June 2, 2008). Summary of Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this study was to understand adult volunteer characteristics, efficacy in instructional strategies, and motivational orientations on Florida Master Gardener tenure. The primary objectiv es of the study were: 1 To describe participant demographics in the Florida Master Gardener program. 2 To describe Master Gardeners efficacy in instructional strategies as volunteer educators; specifically: (a) ability to respond to difficult questions, (b) ability to gauge client comprehension of the information taught, (c) ability to craft good questions for clients, (d) ability to adjust information to the proper level for individual clients, (e) comfort with using evaluation strategies, (f) ability to pro vide an alternative explanation when clients are confused, and (g) the ability to implement alternative teaching strategies in their instruction. 3 To describe the motivational orientations of adults participating in Master Gardener; specifically: (a) Comp etence related curiosity, (b) Interpersonal relations, (c) Community service, (d) Professional advancement, (e) Compliance with external influences, and (f) Escape from routine. 4 To determine if significant differences exist between efficacy in instructio nal strategies based on participant demographics. 5 To determine if significant differences exist between motivational orientations based on participant demographics. 6 To describe any existing relationships between efficacy in instructional strategies and motivational orientations for adults participating in Master Gardener. 7 To test the unidimensionality of Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scale. 8 To understand the effects of motivational orientations and efficacy in instructional strategies on M aster Gardener tenure.

PAGE 93

93 Summary of Methodology The population for this study was adults participating in the Florida Master Gardener program. Approximately 3,822 adult Floridians participate in the Master Gardener program (E. Eubanks, personal communicat ion, March 8, 2009). The sample size was 613 Master Gardener participants. Data were collected through the implementation of a mail survey. Participants were contacted via mail using the Tailored Design Method outlined by Dillman, Smyth, and Christian (2009). A final response rate of 86.79% ( N = 532) was attained. According to Cochran (1977), a sample size of 362 usable surveys was required for a confidence interval of +/ 5 when N = 3,822. There were 530 usable responses. Early and late respondents were analyzed via the procedure identified by Lindner, Murphy, and Briers (2001). No significant differences were found between early and late respondents. The studys findings are generalizable to adults participating in the Florida Master Gardener program. T he studys independent variables were (a) gender, (b) ethnicity, (c) age, (d) education, (e) income, (f) Master Gardener tenure, (g) length of Florida of residence, and (h) if participants were native Floridians. The dependent variable was adult volunteer tenure in the Florida Master Gardener program. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 17.0, was used to analyze the data according to the research objectives. Objectives one through three were analyzed using descriptive methods. Ob jectives four and five were analyzed utilizing analysis of variance (ANOVA). Objective six was analyzed through the calculation of correlation coefficients. Objective seven was analyzed using principal component analysis. Objective eight was analyzed throu gh the implementation of Poisson regression.

PAGE 94

94 Conclusions, Implications, and Recommendations Objective One: Conclusions The first objective was to describe participant demographics in the Florida Master Gardener program. The demographic characteristics mea sured were: (a) gender, (b) ethnicity, (c) age, (d) income, (e) Master Gardener Tenure, (f) length of residence in Florida, and (f) if participants were native Floridians. Most of the respondents were women. Women accounted for 73.01% ( n = 387) of the res ponses. Males accounted for 26.90% ( n = 143) of the responses. Most respondents were white. Whites accounted for 92.07% ( n = 488) of the responses. Hispanics accounted for 2.26% ( n = 12), African Americans accounted for 1.69 % ( n = 9), Asians accounted fo r 1.50% ( n = 8), Other accounted for 1.32% ( n = 7), and Native American accounted for .75% ( n = 4). Most respondents were 56 years old or older. Seventy percent of respondents ( n = 421) were 56 years old or over. Very few respondents were between 18 and 45 years old. The 18 45 years old individuals accounted for 3.77% ( n = 20) of the responses. Adults 46 55 years old accounted for 16.41% ( n = 87) of the responses. A large percentage of respondents had obtained some form of higher education. Seventynine percent ( n = 415) of respondents had earned at least an Associates Degree. Adults with a high diploma or equivalent accounted for 21.32% ( n = 113) of the responses. Most respondents earned between $24,999 and $99,999 annually. Adults indicating their annual income was between $24,999 and $99,999 annually accounted for 61.32% ( n = 325) of the responses. Respondents earning $24,999 or less accounted for 13.39% ( n = 71) of the responses. Respondents earning $100,000 or more annually accounted for 13.58% ( n = 72) of the responses.

PAGE 95

95 A large portion of respondents had been Master Gardeners between 2 and 10 years 66.79% ( n = 354) of the responses. Respondents who had been Master Gardeners over one year accounted for 19.43% ( n = 103). Fourteen percent of r espondents ( n = 73) had been involved in the program for 11 or more years. Most (75.84%, n = 402) of the respondents had lived in Florida for at least eleven years. Of those respondents, nearly 40% had lived in Florida for 31 years or more. Despite thes e numbers, few (12.26%, n = 65) respondents were native Floridians. Eighty -eight percent of respondents ( n = 463) were not born in Florida. Objective One: Implications Age, education, income were specific demographic characteristics of respondents that re inforced Houles (1961) Typology. Houle identified common characteristics of adults that were universal toward their participation in continued learning. Adults with higher annual salaries are more likely to participate in educational programs than adult w ith low incomes. Younger adults are less likely to participate in continued learning opportunities than older adults. Adults who have earned formal education degrees are more likely to participate in educational programs versus those who have not (Houle). Respondents in this study were homogenous (older, white, women, educated and well off). Boshier (1971, p. 6, 2) said identified motivational orientations cannot be assumed to exist in other participant samples when the studied group is homogenous. Ma ster Gardeners are a population that has been determined to be homogenous in other studies (Rohs, Stribilng, & Westerfield, 2002; Rouse & Clawson, 1992; Ruppert et al., 1997; Waliczek, Zajicek & Lineberger, 2005). The guidelines required to participate in Florida MG may align with the homogenous adult demographic characteristics identified from this study.

PAGE 96

96 Rogers (2003) research on early adopters confirms Houles findings due to the fact Master Gardeners have received more formal education and are more ap t to being accepting of educational opportunities. The findings from this study support Rogers and Houles theories on adult participation in continued learning. Formal education was a precursor to adults participation in MG. Banduras (1997) self -effica cy theory does not indentify adults demographic characteristics as influential in determining level of efficacy. Objective One: Recommendations for Research Further research is needed on other existing state Master Gardener programs to ascertain if the m ajority of Master Gardeners are similar in demographic make up as to those in Florida. This would provide a broad picture of what Master Gardener demographic characteristics look like in the respective state program, and more holistically across the nation This information would be helpful to state administrators, state MG coordinators and program planners to develop an understanding of MG participant characteristics in order to serve participants most appropriately. The findings would inform state Extens ion administrators of the demographic make up of this corps of volunteer educators. Additionally, this would allow MG coordinators to develop an understanding of what the characteristics of potential participants are in order to market the program with the goal of gaining new participants annually. Further research is needed to determine if demographic characteristics of respondents in this study and their MG coordinator are similar. Specifically, the facets of agent and client homophily and heterophily on program participation should be studied. This would inform researchers and practitioners if Rogers (2003) findings of change agent and client homophily and heterophily are present in the Florida Master Gardener program. If Florida Master Gardeners are h omophilic to their MG coordinator, this could explain another facet to adult participation. This recommendation could easily be conducted with the dataset produced from this study to

PAGE 97

97 represent Florida MG participants, and MG coordinators. This facet could help in explaining the findings of the demographic characteristics of respondents from this study. The researcher utilized a mail survey to administer the M -EPS. Further research should offer a website link within the first notice in order for participants who prefer to complete the questionnaire online the opportunity. A follow up study should be conducted in Florida within the next ten years to learn if adults motivational orientations have changed. The researcher recognizes by that time all Florida MG participants may have high speed internet access. However, the mail survey was initiated due to the lack of all Florida MG participants having access to high speed internet. Objective One: Recommendations for Practice Since the demographic characteristic s of Florida Master Gardeners have been identified, Florida MG coordinators should take those characteristics into consideration when promoting the program with the purpose of including more participants. This study found Florida Master Gardeners were primarily women, white, attained some form of higher education, and had average or above average incomes. The awareness of these characteristics should assist MG coordinators with better understanding their current and potential audience. If the Florida Mast er Gardener program seeks to include participants with more demographic diversity, then steps will need to be incorporated to promote the inclusion of adults with characteristics dissimilar than those that emerged from this study. Specific demographic data for each Florida County should be considered when the local MG coordinator promotes and plans their program. The researcher admits time requirements of an adult to be a Master Gardener may not be available to all adults. Nonetheless, the attempts to marke t MG to a broader audience should be researched in order for Cooperative Extension to broaden its fleet of volunteer educators (Relf & McDaniel, 1994) and clientele (Peronto & Murphy, 2009). UF

PAGE 98

98 IFAS/Extension should strive to identify, recruit, and train a more ethnically diverse group of adults as volunteer educators for MG. Objective Two: Conclusions The studys second objective was to describe Master Gardeners efficacy in instructional strategies as volunteer educators: (a) ability to respond to diffi cult questions, (b) ability to gauge client comprehension of the information taught, (c) ability to craft good questions for clients, (d) ability to adjust information to the proper level for individual clients, (e) comfort with using evaluation strategies (f) ability to provide an alternative explanation when clients are confused, and (g) the ability to implement alternative teaching strategies in their instruction. The results from this study indicated that respondents felt at least some influence ove r their instructional efficacy. The means ranged from 6.66 ( SD = 1.72) to 5.80 ( SD = 2.10) on a nine point Likert type scale for questions related to instructional efficacy. Respondents felt the most efficacious in their ability to respond to difficult que stions from their clients ( M = 6.66, SD = 1.72). Respondents answers to each of the TSES questions indicated Florida Master Gardeners possessed some influence to quite a bit of instructional efficacy. Respondents were the least efficacious in their ability to utilize evaluation strategies with clientele ( M = 5.80, SD = 2.10). This indicates that among all instructional efficacy items respondents felt the least comfortable with conducting evaluations after their instruction. Objective Two: Implicatio ns Bandura (1993) said self -efficacy was the degree an individuals beliefs regarding their ability to control their level of performance and events that influence their lives. Findings from this study indicate respondents had at least a moderate level of instructional efficacy. Respondents felt some level of comfort in teaching clientele recommended horticultural information provided by UF IFAS/Extension. An individuals level of efficacy can guide

PAGE 99

99 participation in an activity. Bandura suggested self -effi cacy contributes to an adults motivation to participate in an endeavor. Motivational efficacy is the production of an individuals belief of efficacy (Bandura, 1991). Individuals with high self -efficacy are success oriented and thus quickly recover thei r belief of efficacy after disappointments (Bandura). Adults with higher efficacy have enhanced achievements, decreased anxiety levels, and are less prone to dejection (Bandura, 1997). These attributes of self -efficacy operationally contribute to individua l accomplishments. When instructional efficacy is high, individuals are motivated to be successful in their experiences and when instructional efficacy is low, individuals become frustrated and seek other opportunities (Tschannen -Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). Respondents level of instructional efficacy indicated adults felt comfortable in their role as volunteer educators. An adult who has efficacy with his/her volunteer duties is more likely to continue his/her participation in the Master Gardener Program. This is important for Master Gardener participation due to Cooperative Extensions need for volunteers and specifically those that can serve as effective volunteer educators for their local Master Gardener Program. Respondents indicated Master Gardeners had lower efficacy in evaluation strategies than any other instructional efficacy category. This could lead respondents to avoid conducting evaluations with their clients. Bandura (1997) reported adults that have lower self -efficacy in specific duties are l ess likely to participate in activities that require attributes involving those same duties. Individuals with lower efficacy will struggle with self -motivation and quickly admit defeat and move on to another opportunity (Bandura). Adults with low efficacy may discontinue their participation in an activity. This study found respondents instructional efficacy was slightly above average in evaluation strategies and thus it is unlikely they would have a vigorous

PAGE 100

1 00 commitment to those objectives (TschannenMoran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). The goals of the Master Gardener Program are to enable adult volunteers to assist Cooperative Extension in teaching research -based horticultural information to local constituents (Relf & McDaniel, 1994) Cooperative Extension should be concerned if Master Gardeners have average or low self efficacy due to the likelihood adults will discontinue their participation (Tschannen -Moran & Woolfolk Hoy). Objective Two: Recommendations for Research Master Gardeners felt the least efficacious i n their ability to utilize evaluation strategies. This could be due to their MG coordinator having low efficacy in evaluation strategies themselves, and this translates to adult participants being less comfortable in conducting evaluations. Master Gardene rs should have a professional development plan constructed for them. A significant aspect of the plan should include methods to enhance instructional efficacy. This would address cultivating cognitive efficacy in Master Gardeners. Cognitive efficacy is th e extent individuals construct goals according to a personal assessment of their aptitude (Bandura, 1997). A MG professional development plan should be researched in order to determine participants level of instructional efficacy before the professional d evelopment experience, during the middle of their involvement in the program, and their level of instructional efficacy after their participation has concluded. This aspect would inform researchers and practitioners if the professional development plan imp roved Master Gardeners instructional efficacy. If not, the professional development plan should be altered in order to make sure volunteer educators are properly trained and prepared to educate Floridas citizens.

PAGE 101

101 Objective Two: Recommendations for Practi ce The inclusion of a formal mentoring program is recommended as well. More seasoned Master Gardeners identified to have high instructional efficacy should be utilized to mentor less seasoned participants in instructional methods. This mentoring system sh ould be researched to identify participants level of instructional efficacy at the beginning, middle, and the conclusion of the mentoring process. This information would assist researchers, and state and local program planners in learning the value of thi s type of professional development, and changes could be made to enhance the program accordingly. A robust sense of efficacy causes individuals to set enhanced objectives after their initial objective is accomplished (Bandura, 1997). This experience could enhance the motivational efficacy of Master Gardeners with high instructional efficacy by providing another objective to their role as volunteer educators for the program. Implementing additional challenges constructs new motivating differences for individuals to achieve (Bandura). This facet would provide another method in improving current and future Florida Master Gardeners instructional efficacy. Given their economic value (total value of Florida Master Gardener volunteer hours in 2007 worth approxim ately $8,000,000, L. Arrington, personal communication, June 1, 2008) and subsequent roles as ambassadors of UF IFAS/Extension across the state, Master Gardeners are one of the most prized resources the university has. The inclusion of more quality volunte er educators in the MG program would be a benefit to UF IFAS/Extension. The instructional efficacy findings from this study indicate reasons why adults may chose to terminate their involvement in the MG program. If participants have moderate or low instru ctional efficacy, the likelihood adults end MG involvement in increased (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). Data on the instructional efficacy construct should assist local and state coordinators in understanding what does and does not cause adult rete ntion in the MG program

PAGE 102

102 (Flagler, 1992). When educators possess high instructional efficacy, they are more likely to remain in their teaching role (Tschannen -Moran & Woolfolk Hoy). Steps should be taken to enhance Master Gardeners instructional efficacy i n order for UF IFAS/Extension to get the most bang for their buck (Meyer & Hanchek, 1997; Swackhamer & Kiernan, 2005) from these volunteer educators, and to ensure that adults continue their participation in this program. The findings indicate Master Gar deners need their own formal professional development experiences provided by the local MG coordinator, and overseen by the state coordinator. This type of program plan should include objectives that are specific and relevant, and an ongoing evaluation com ponent to ascertain if participants are demonstrating higher efficacy in instructional strategies. The studys findings in instructional efficacy indicates a need for a formal statewide mentoring program for MG. Adults new to the MG should be assigned to a mentor who has been identified by the local MG coordinator to possess high instructional efficacy. MG coordinators should utilize participants instructional efficacy as a motivation (Bandura, 1997) to provide them more opportunities to teach and prepare Master Gardeners who are less efficacious with instructional strategies. Brudney (1999) recommended educational programs relying on volunteers in the public sector should utilize adults that have efficacy in their roles in order for the organization to be the most effective. This would address Banduras recommendations of methods to improve efficacy in others. The new participant could accompany the seasoned Master Gardener when planning an educational program, when they teach clientele out in the communit y, and in the Extension office answering client questions via the telephone or webpage. This would assist the new members in actively learning the techniques in a realistic setting.

PAGE 103

103 Again, the instructional efficacy of the new MG participants should be mea sured at the beginning, middle and the conclusion of the mentoring experience. MG participants should be provided experiences to practice teaching with clientele. It is possible that MG participants will perceive instructional efficacy higher at the concl usion of those instructional opportunities than initial perceptions prior to teaching. Agricultural teachers have indicated an increase in perceived instructional efficacy after the student teaching experience (Roberts, Harlin, & Ricketts, 2006; Stripling et al., 2008). This method is yet another approach to enhance MG instructional efficacy. The benefit of instructional efficacy for agricultural teachers resulted in success in difficult environments. Knoblach and Whittington (2003) found agricultural teach ers with a high sense of teaching efficacy were more likely to handle and succeed when confronted with challenging teaching assignments. At the least, Florida Master Gardeners need professional development related to using evaluation strategies. This stu dy found Master Gardeners felt the least comfortable in utilizing evaluation strategies. Since Master Gardeners are the least comfortable in implementing evaluation strategies, it may be due not being adequately trained in those techniques. Teacher efficac y in evaluation strategies indicates the level of comfort of analyzing instructional efforts by the educator (Tschannen -Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). Possessing knowledge and capabilities does not translate into an individual capable of utilizing them (Ban dura, 1993). Master Gardener coordinators and high instructional efficacy Master Gardeners should construct open and comfortable learning environments for new Master Gardeners, and current participants possessing low instructional efficacy. Learning envi ronments play a significant role in the attainment of individual efficacy (Bandura). The importance of including these types of learning environments in order to improve instructional

PAGE 104

104 efficacy should be underestimated. Bandura said learning environments that interpret aptitude as a learnable skill, pay less attention to social comparison competitions, and underscore personal comparisons of development and achievements are a best fit for constructing an efficacy setting that encourages enhanced learning. Mas ter Gardeners coordinators, local officer councils and participants with high instructional efficacy should work together to ensure learning environments are cultivating enhanced instructional efficacy for current and potential Master Gardeners. This appr oach may assist in retaining Master Gardeners who serve as advertisements for Cooperative Extension (Stouse & Marr, 1992), and improving current participants instructional efficacy which should allow Cooperative Extension is to achieve organizational obj ectives (Smith, 2005). Given Master Gardeners economic value to the UF IFAS/Extension, the organization should support an effort to offer professional development to participants. UF/IFAS Extension should provide resources to hire an individual with the r esponsibility of training MG participants in instructional efficacy and monitoring Master Gardeners pr ogress as volunteer educators. Along with the state coordinator, the individuals role would be to consistently evaluate current programming efforts and instructional practices of local coordinators and Master Gardeners in order to determine if teaching impacts are occurring and if not report those findings to the state coordinator in order to institute the appropriate changes. Objective Three: Conclusion s The studys third objective was to describe the motivational orientation for adults to participate in Master Gardener: (a) Competence related curiosity, (b) Interpersonal relations, (c) Community service, (d) Professional advancement, (e) Compliance wit h external influences, and (f) Escape from routine. Respondents indicated a Competence related Curiosity had much influence on their participation in MG. The Community Service and Interpersonal Relations

PAGE 105

105 constructs revealed to have moderate influence on adult participation. Respondents indicated Escape from Routine had little influence on their participation. The External Influence and Professional Advancement constructs revealed to have no influence on their participation. The findings from thi s study were similar to other studies of Master Gardeners (Finch, 1997; Kirsch & VanDerZanden, 2002; Meyer, 2004; Rouse & Clawson, 1992; Schott, 2001; Schrock et al., 2000; Schrock, 1999; Simonson & Pals, 1990; Wolford, Cox, & Culp III, 2001) in that Flori da Master Gardeners primarily participated to learn new information. Respondents had the highest motivational orientation means for the Competence related Curiosity construct (M = 4.35, SD = .63), and thus indicated the construct had much influence on their participation in the program. This studys findings were similar to findings from previous studies indicating adults were primarily motivated to participate for a Competence related Curiosity (Baxter, 1990; Boccolucci 1992; Cherwony, 1982; Edlow, 1983; Farmer, 2008; Fisher, 1986; Garofolo, 1995; Heintzelman 1989; Kolner, 1983; Miller, 1991; Okafor, 1997; Reynolds, 1986; Russett; 1999; Spell, 1989; Waring, 1995). The Community service and Professional Development constructs were associated with the goal -oriented classification (Mergener, 1979). In this study, respondents indicated Community Service had moderate influence on their MG participation. Respondents indicated Professional A dvancement had no influence toward participation in MG. Houle (1961) said adults in the goal oriented classification have identified a personal interest to develop to a higher degree, and through continued learning experiences. Interpersonal Relations, Escape from Routine and External Influence were associated with the activity oriented classification (Mergener, 1979). Social contact is the primary attribute that motivates activity -oriented adults to participate in continued education (Houle, 1961).

PAGE 106

106 Res pondents indicated Interpersonal Relations and Escape from Routine had little influence on their participation. External Influence had no influence on their participation. Objective Three: Implications In this study, the Competence related Curiosity c onstruct had the highest means for Florida Master Gardeners, and had much influence on participation. The Competence related Curiosity construct addresses Houles (1961) learning-oriented group (Mergener, 1979). Respondents in this study were primarily l earning oriented and participated in MG to fulfill a desire to learn. Boshier and Collins (1985) defined the learning -oriented adults as individuals who participate in continued learning for the happiness from education and the need to identify a solution to a current problem. Florida Master Gardeners were learning oriented and believe continued learning is an experience that is personally enjoyable (Houle). Learning -oriented adults tend to perceive pursing education will enhance their lives. Community se rvice was found to have moderate influence on adult participation in Florida MG. The results from the Community Service construct indicated adults were goal oriented and more interested in the MG program for the opportunity to assist the community. Goal -oriented adults participate in continued learning in order to meet a personal goal (Houle). The other activity -oriented construct (Professional Development) was found to have no influence on MG participation. Seventy percent of respondents were ages 5 6 or over. This would account for Professional Development having no influence MG participation as probably most respondents were either retired or contemplating retirement. Activity -oriented adults tend to participate in continued learning to seek new friends or create a new routine (Houle, 1961). Results from this study indicated Florida MG participants were not activity -oriented. Constructs associated with the activity oriented classification

PAGE 107

107 (Interpersonal Relations, Escape from Routine and External Influence) were found to have little or no influence on adult participation. Florida MG participants were not activity -oriented. Objective Three: Recommendations for Research State MG programs should develop an understanding of what motivates adults to participate in their local program. Developing an understanding that adults are in one of the learning classifications (learning, goal, and activity) is advantageous in determining and leading adult education (Houle, 1961). The M -EPS illustrated six motiv ational orientations that explained why adults participated in the Florida MG program. Other state programs should assess why adults participate as volunteer educators in MG due to the benefit they provide the land -grant institution. The findings may assis t state administrators and state program planners identify other avenues to include volunteer educators in other Extension programs in order to more effectively and efficiently bring the university to the people (Rasmussen, 1989). An educational program may draw adults from all three classifications but each adult participates for particular objectives (Houle). A comprehensive study on if motivational orientations related to MG tenure and recruitment would be beneficial to program planners and local coor dinators. The results would be beneficial in order to predict MG tenure, attract new volunteer educators, and to serve participant needs based upon motivational orientation as recommended by (Houle, 1961). If being learning oriented contributed to MG tenur e, then local coordinators could construct new and enhance current MG experiences to ensure improved learning opportunities exist. Developing an understanding that adults are in at least one of three groupings is beneficial in discerning and leading adult education (Houle).

PAGE 108

108 Objective Three: Recommendations for Practice MG participants in this study were neither goal nor activity oriented. This study identified that Florida Master Gardeners were learning -oriented. Extension agents that serve as MG Coordinat ors can use this study to understand what does and does not motivate adults to participate in the MG Program (Flagler, 1992). Promotional materials can be altered to increase initial participation from adults primarily interested in learning and serving their local community. Marketing MG as the ideal organization for learning horticultural information and sharing the knowledge with local constituents in order to enhance Floridas communities would appear to be an attractive promotional slogan. This may ent ice adults who are interested in MG but unaware of what the program provides volunteer educators and clients. MG should continue to be marketed as the go to outlet for horticultural information and thus, assist Cooperative Extension in increasing clientele s knowledge and skills in order to provide solutions to their problems (Seevers, Graham, & Conklin, 2007). Adults were similar in their learning orientations associated with their participation in the local MG program. Participants should be provided mor e opportunities to learn detailed information from a state specialist based. Adults who are mainly interested in learning and sharing horticulture related subject matter may be more enticed to remain involved if opportunities to learn from a specialist are provided. This experience would provide more detailed knowledge for participants to share with clientele. As the findings indicate, Florida MG participants are learning -oriented. More learning experiences should be provided to current participants in orde r to enhance learning to assist in retaining adults in the program. Objective Four: Conclusions The studys fourth objective was to determine if significant differences exist between efficacy in instructional strategies (a) ability to respond to difficult questions, (b) ability to gauge

PAGE 109

109 client comprehension of the information taught, (c) ability to craft good questions for clients, (d) ability to adjust information to the proper level for individual clients, (e) comfort with using evaluation strategies, ( f) ability to provide an alternative explanation when clients are confused, and (g) the ability to implement alternative teaching strategies in their instruction based on participant demographics (gender, age, race, education, income, length of Master Gard ener tenure, length of Florida residence, state of birth). There was a significant difference in education, F (4, 520) = 5.55, p < .05, and the effect size was negligible ( = .04). Education accounted for 4% of the variance in instructional strategies. There was a significant difference ( p < .05) from respondents who had earned a high school diploma ( M = 6.09, SD = 1.42) and those who had earned a Masters Degree ( M = 6.69, SD = 1.41). There was a significant difference ( p < .05) from respondents who had earned an Associates Degree ( M = 5.83, SD = 1.56) and those who had earned a Masters Degree ( M = 6.69, SD = 1.41), and respondents who had earned an Associates Degree ( M = 5.83, SD = 1.56) and those who had earned a Doctoral/Professional Degree ( M = 6.65, SD = 1.71). Objective Four: Implications According to Tschannen Moran and Woolfolk Hoy (2001), self -efficacy predicts how educators will cultivate learning in their stu dents. Education produced a significant difference in adults instructional efficacy. Respondents who had earned at least a Bachelors Degree had more instructional efficacy than individuals that did not. As respondents level of education went up, adults level of instructional efficacy went up. This could have been due to a level of comfort more educated respondents felt when given the responsibility of serving as a volunteer educator in a nonformal teaching environment. The more experiences higher educat ed individuals had with robust learning environments may have caused respondents instructional efficacy to have higher means than less educated adults. Bandura (1997) said success provides adults confidence

PAGE 110

110 and enhances in self -efficacy. The success respo ndents attained in earning more formal education degrees may have constructed an improved self -perception of instructional efficacy. The analysis produced no other significant differences in demographic characteristics and instructional efficacy. Objective Four: Recommendations for Research More research is needed on the influence of participants level of education and instructional efficacy. This study found education to be lone demographic characteristic significantly ( p < .05) influencing instructional efficacy. Further research should be conducted on participant demographic characteristics and instructional efficacy in state MG programs. A broader understanding of how demographic characteristics influence or do not influence instructional efficacy of M G participants, across the U.S., would build upon Banduras (1997) self -efficacy theory and add to Tschannen -Moran and Woolfolk Hoys (2001) research on educators instructional efficacy. Objective Four: Recommendations for Practice The studys results pr ovide Florida MG coordinators an understanding of how most demographic characteristics do not influence participant instructional efficacy. These findings reinforce Banduras (1997) suggestions that cognitive and affective efficacy can be improved in all i ndividuals. Due to the economic value MG participants provide Cooperative Extension, an importance exists for Master Gardeners to receive training in order to develop enhanced instructional efficacy. Instructional efficacy can be improved in all teachers ( Tschannen -Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001).Volunteers possessing more instructional efficacy were provided opportunities to develop through training and preparation (Collins & Layne, 2003). Swackhamer and Kiernan (2005) reported adults serving as volunteers pos sessing efficacy in their roles are more likely to continue participating in MG.

PAGE 111

111 Objective Five: Conclusions The studys fifth objective was to determine if significant differences existed between motivational orientations based on participant demographi cs. Women were more apt to participate in the MG program in order to learn than men. The study found men participated in MG due to an External Influence more than women. Men were more motivated to participate than women for Professional Advancement. Even though there was a negligible effect, women were more learning oriented than men. Men were more interested in participating in the MG program for an External Influence and Professional Advancement. According to Houle, this finding indicates men were more goal oriented than women. Respondents significantly differed in their motivational orientations by age. Adults age 56 65 were more motivated to participate in MG for the Competence related Curiosity construct than respondents ages 66 and over. This indi cates the 56 65 years old group was more learning oriented than those 66 and over. Community Service and Interpersonal Relations are constructs associated with Houles (1961) activity-oriented classification Respondents between ages 46 55 years old we re more apt to participate in MG for Community Service and Interpersonal Relations than adults 56 and over. Older respondents were less activity -oriented as a motivation to participate in Florida MG. Other significant differences existed among demographi c characteristics and motivational orientations. There was a significant difference in education, income, race and length of Florida residence on External Influence. Respondents with a High School Diploma were more motivated by an External Influence to pa rticipate than other adults. Individuals earning $25,000 49,999 annually were more motivated to participate than other respondents. Non-whites were

PAGE 112

112 more motivated to participate for an External Influence than whites. Adults who have lived in Florida 21 30 years were motivated by External Influence than other individuals to participate. A significant difference existed in income on Professional Advancement. There was a significant difference in race and Community Service. Non -whites were more interested in Community Service than whites. A significant difference existed between Master Gardener tenure and Interpersonal Relations. Adults serving 11 years or more were more interested in Interpersonal Relations as a motivational orientation than other MG part icipants. Objective Five: Implications Results from MG participation by gender have implications for Houles (1961) Typology. Women were more learning -oriented than men. This finding is key due to the vast majority (73%) of MG participants were women. The se results add to Houles research. This population, composed mainly of women, was more interested in participating in MG for learning than men. Results from this study indicated men were more goal -oriented that women. Findings from this study strengthen H oules findings in that men were more goal oriented than women due to men being more motivated to participate by Professional Advancement or External Influence. Additionally, results for MG participation by age have implications for Houles (1961) Typolo gy. Respondents ages 56 65 were more learning-oriented than adults ages 66 and over. Adults over 56 were less activity -oriented than younger adults. These results reinforce Houles (1961) findings that older adults are more activityoriented than younger adults. Younger adults were more motivated by External Influence to participate in MG than older adults. This would indicate that older respondents were less interested in participating in MG than younger adults to fulfill a professional obligation, the r equirements of a government agency, to address recommendations from an authority, and to comply with someone elses recommendations.

PAGE 113

113 External Influence was significant for education, income, race, and length of Florida residence. A significant difference existed in income on Professional Advancement, race and Community Service, and Master Gardener tenure and Interpersonal Relations. An educational program may attract adults for a variety of reasons (Houle, 1961). Objective Five: Recommendations for Resea rch State MG programs should research the motivational orientation differences in gender on MG participation. Other state MG programs should examine if women are more learning oriented than men. This study found that women were the majority of MG participants, and a significant difference existed among womens Competence related Curiosity than men. If women are the majority of participants in other states, then developing an understanding of womens primary motivational orientation would assist state and l ocal coordinators in preparing current training and marketing techniques to target this population in order to meet their needs. Comprehending if men are more goal oriented than women in other state MG programs would offer insight on how to address mens n eeds in MG participation. Beyond motivational orientations, there may be other factors that influence Master Gardener tenure. Researchers should examine the relationship between the local MG coordinator and adult participants in the local program. The in fluence of the local coordinator may impact MG tenure in respective counties. The research findings should be made available to administrators, state staff and local practitioners. Objective Five: Recommendations for Practice Florida MG coordinators shoul d utilize these findings to market the program depending on the gender of potential participants. Coordinators would want to ensure that all potential participants understood the advantages MG offered for learning horticultural subject matter though women are more learning -oriented than men. Potential male participants would be more

PAGE 114

114 interested than women in learning how MG could improve them as professionals. Coordinators should understand that older adults are less interested in participating MG and Profes sional Advancement. MG coordinators should understand that adults participate in the program for a variety of reasons. Results from this study indicated adults were significantly interested in MG for Community Service, Interpersonal Relations, External I nfluence and Professional Advancement. Houle (1961) said none of the motivational orientations are better than another but practitioners should understand the differences in motivational orientations and demographic characteristics. Objective Six: Conclus ions The studys sixth objective was to describe any existing relationships between efficacy in instructional strategies and motivational orientations for adults participating in Master Gardener (a) Competence related Curiosity, (b) Community Service, (c) Interpersonal Relations, (d) Escape from Routine, (e) External Influence, and (f) Professional Advancement for adults participating in Master Gardener. Respondents instructional efficacy was positively correlated with their Competence related Curiosity, Community Service, and Interpersonal Relations motivational orientations. Competence related Curiosity and Instructional Efficacy were significant low associated ( r = .23). Community Service and Instructional Efficacy exhibited a significant low associatio n ( r = .25). Interpersonal Relations and Instructional Efficacy were significantly negligible associated ( r = .09). There were no significant associations with Escape from Routine, External Influence and Professional Advancement between Instructional Effic acy. Objective Six: Implications Various motivational orientations exist as to the reasons adults participate in continued learning (Houle, 1961). Other aspects indicate adult participation in continued learning beyond

PAGE 115

115 motivational orientations. This stud y found Instructional Efficacy was correlated with Competence related Curiosity, Community Service, and Interpersonal Relations. Competence related Curiosity and instructional efficacy builds upon Houles (1979) Typology and Bandura (1997) research. Competence related Curiosity is associated with the learning -oriented classification. Learning oriented adults have a strong desire to learn and identify perpetual learning as a responsibility that will improve them as members of society (Houle). Bandura said individuals self -efficacy affects the implementation of objectives and critical thinking. Learning oriented participants possessed instructional efficacy and desired to share horticultural knowledge with fellow citizens. The correlation of this two constr ucts (Competence related Curiosity and instructional efficacy) adds to the Houles Typology and Banduras self -efficacy theory and better helps explain participant MG tenure Respondents scored low on the Competence related Curiosity ( r = .23) and Community Service ( r = .25) constructs, and negligible on the Interpersonal Relations construct ( r = .09) related to instructional efficacy. These findings indicate when the motivational orientations (Competence related Curiosity, Community Service and Interper sonal Relations) increase, then instructional efficacy increases. These results provide Florida Cooperative Extension knowledge that motivational orientations influenced Master Gardeners instructional efficacy. This study previously uncovered that Florida MG participants are learning -oriented, and that classification improves instructional efficacy. Objective Six: Recommendations for Research This information could assist practitioners develop an understanding of features that motivate adults to volunteer for Cooperative Extension (Boyd, 2004). Other state MG participants should be researched in order for program planners and administrators to develop an understanding of why adults chose to volunteer for this program. Developing an understanding

PAGE 116

116 of the ass ociations among constructs may assist Cooperative Extension in retaining high quality Master Gardeners as volunteer educators in order for the organization to reap a high quality return on their investment (Meyer & Hanchek, 1997; Swackhamer & Kiernan, 2005). The instructional efficacy of learning oriented adults should be studied separately from goal and activity -oriented participants. The results should be made available to program planners and local coordinators due to the majority of MG participants in F lorida were motivated to learn. Objective Six: Recommendations for Practice This research objective uncovered other facets that increase instructional efficacy. The findings that motivational orientations (Competence related Curiosity, Community Service a nd Interpersonal Relations) contribute to instructional efficacy should assist practitioners in learning additional factors that affect participants instructional efficacy. Florida MG coordinators should include more opportunities for participants to lear n, serve the community, and develop social relationships due to those attributes positively affecting instructional efficacy. This recommendation should assist practitioners to offer experiences that motivate adults to continue with volunteer responsibilit ies (Corporation for National and Community Service, 2006). Providing Master Gardeners opportunities to teach citizens in instructional teams may address participant motivational orientations (Competence related Curiosity, Community Service and Interperson al Relations) and jointly enhance instructional efficacy. Local MG coordinators and the state MG director of Cooperative Extension systems should develop an understanding of the many facets that lead adults to participate in the MG program. When this is a ddressed, local coordinators and the state director can focus program promotional material, and the lessons they utilize to train and prepare adults to be volunteer educators to meet the needs of these valuable resources. When participants needs are met, adults are more likely to continue their participation (Houle).

PAGE 117

117 Objective Seven: Conclusions The studys seventh objective was to test the unidimensionality of Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scale. The researcher utilized factor loadings produced by principal component analysis to examine the M -EPS. Previous items associated with constructs identified by Mergener, loaded on separate constructs in this study. Constructs were renamed due to new items loading on different constructs. The Competenc e related Curiosity construct was renamed Learning, the Interpersonal Relations construct was renamed Socialization, and the Escape from Routine construct was renamed Vary Routine. Items on the Professional Advancement and External Influence construc ts loaded jointly after testing with the principal component analysis and the construct was renamed Professional Enhancement. One new construct, Others Perceptions, was created from the factor loadings. Six items loaded on the Learning construct and i tems ranged from .82 to .45. Five items loaded on the Community Service construct ranging from .78 to .43 and five items loaded on the Socialization construct ranging from .76 to .56. Seven items loaded on the Vary Routine construct and items ranged from 79 to .50. Eight items loaded on the Professional Enhancement construct and items ranged from .80 to .45. Four items loaded on the Others Perceptions construct and items ranged from .65 to .51. Objective Seven: Implications Houle (1961) said adults parti cipate in continued learning for a variety for reasons. Boshier (1971) constructed the Education Participation Scale composed of constructs based upon Houles Typology. Mergener (1979) modified Boshiers work and constructed his own M -EPS. The constructs p roduced from testing the unidimensionality of the M -EPS in this study serve to further knowledge on Houles original findings as well.

PAGE 118

118 The modified constructs of the M -EPS f it Houles (1961) Typology ( Figure 5 1). The learning -oriented group includes the Learning construct. The activity -oriented group includes the Socialization, Community Service, Vary Routine and Others Perceptions constructs. The goal oriented classification includes the Professional Enhancement construct. Houle said the di fferences in adults are the focal point of his typology. The factors may have loaded differently due to dissimilar populations. Mergeners (1979) study included pharmacy students participating in a continued learning experience mandated by the profession. Adults participating in MG as volunteer educators may have caused items to load on separate constructs in this study. The disparity in factor loadings may not solely be due to the population but could include the type of educational program. The differenc e of factor loadings could simply be explained by adults participating in mandated educational programs versus adults volunteering in an educational program. Objective Seven: Recommendations for Research Researchers should utilize the modified version of Mergeners (1979) Education Participation Scale to examine Master Gardeners motivational orientations for MG participation. The inclusion of the modified version may provide researchers and practitioners more insight on adult motivations in MG. The modif ied version of the M EPS should be tested further in order to ascertain if identical items load on similar constructs as this study. MG participants should not be the only population researched with the modified M EPS. Diverse adult populations should be s tudied with the modified version of the M EPS due to the potential of gaining insight on adult motivations for participating in educational programs. Objective Seven: Recommendations for Practice The modified version of the M EPS provided insight on motivational orientations of adults participating in Florida MG. The modified Learning construct related to Houles

PAGE 119

119 Figure 5 1 Houle and M EPS Constructs Realigned Res ulting from Principal Component Anal ysis Mergeners (1979) M EPS Constructs Houles (1961) Classifications Competence related Curiosity Community Service Learning o riented Activity oriented Goal oriented Interpersonal Relations Escape from Routine Professional Advancement External Influence Modified Constructs from Mergeners (1979) M EPS Socia lization Community Service Vary Routine Others Perceptions Learning Houles (1961) Classifica tions Professional Enhancement Learning o riented Activity oriented Goal oriented

PAGE 120

120 (1961) learningoriented classification. This information should inform MG coordinators that adults in this classification are devoted to learning and participate in the educational program due to their constant quest of learning (Houle). The modi fied constructs of Socialization, Community Service, Vary Routine and Others Perceptions related to Houles (1961) activity-oriented classification. These findings should assist practitioners in developing an understanding of adults in this classification participates in MG for diverse reasons associated with social contact (Houle). The modified construct of Professional Enhancement relates to Houles (1961) g oal oriented classification. The s e results should infor m MG coordinators that adults i n this cla ssification would participate in MG in order to meet a professional objective or a goal someone has recommended to accomplish (Houle). An essential need exists for local MG coordinators to learn adults motivations for participating in the program. MG practitioners should be aware of these constructs and learning classifications in order to meet the needs of adult participants (Houle, 1961). An adult educator will be best prepared to educate adults when a complete understanding of reasons associated with the individuals participation is known (Boshier, 1971). Objective Eight: Conclusions The studys eighth objective was to understand effects of the combined attributes of motivation orientations and efficacy in instructional strategies on Master Gardene r tenure. Age was the sole demographic characteristic that significantly predicted MG tenure. Instructional efficacy and the motivational orientations (Learning, Socialization, Vary Routine, and Others Perceptions) were significantly associated with MG te nure

PAGE 121

121 Age, motivational orientations, and instructional efficacy were tested for significant interactions. This study indicated a significant ( p < .05) interaction of participant age and level of instructional efficacy predicted adults tenure in the MG p rogram. A significant ( p < .05) interaction of participant age and motivational orientations (Community Service and Others Perceptions) predicted adults tenure in MG. The Poisson regression model for this study was illustrated as: Master Gardner tenure = .16 + .23 Age + .12 Instructional Efficacy + ( .10) Learning + ( .10) Socialization + .09 Vary Routine + .14 Others Perceptions. Objective Eight: Implications The researcher believed connections among the demographic characteristics, motivational orient ations and instructional efficacy would have existed in the findings. Specifically, the researcher believed gender, age, race, education, and income would have been significant in determining a portion of MG tenure. As this study revealed, age was the lone significant ( p < .05) demographic characteristic that affected MG tenure. Race may not have been significant due to 92% of the respondents were white. Education may not have been significant due to the majority of respondents had received higher education experience. Instructional efficacy was anticipated to affect MG tenure due to the responsibilities have as volunteer educators in the program (UF Master Gardener Program, 2009). Findings revealed instructional efficacy was significantly ( p < .05) relate d to MG tenure. This finding was anticipated due to Bandura (1997) reporting individuals with increased efficacy are more likely to continue their involvement in an activity due to efficacy. The researcher expected specific motivational orientations (Lea rning, Socialization, Community Service, Vary Routine and Others Perceptions) to significantly contribute to MG tenure but was surprised certain constructs did not. Learning was anticipated to affect MG tenure due to respondents from this study were prima rily learning -oriented. In this study, adults were

PAGE 122

122 primarily learning oriented but other constructs also significantly affected MG tenure. Learning, Socialization, Vary Routine and Others Perceptions were found to significantly ( p < .05) affect MG tenure. In this study, adults were neither activity or goal -oriented. However, findings indicated Socialization, Vary Routine and Others Perceptions offered insight on various other reasons adults participate in MG. These findings paralleled Houles (1961) Typ ology. Houle said a specific educational program may draw individuals from all three classifications. Community service on its own was anticipated to significantly affect MG tenure due to participants ages and roles individuals have as volunteer educator s in MG. The results indicated community service, when not tested for an interaction with demographic characteristics, did not significantly affect MG tenure. The connections did not exist among Professional Enhancement and MG tenure due to the age of the population. Seventy-percent of the respondents were age 56 or over. The motivation to enhance ones ability in a profession would not be great due to age of the adult. As the only demographic characteristic significantly affecting MG tenure, age was anal yzed for significant interactions with instructional efficacy and the motivational orientations (Learning, Socialization, Community Service, Vary Routine, Others Perceptions and Professional Enhancement). Significant ( p < .05) interactions were revealed a mong age and instructional efficacy and age and the motivational orientations (Community Service, Vary Routine and Others Perceptions). The researcher believed age and Learning did not produce a significant interaction due to the vast majority of particip ants were previously found to be learning -oriented.

PAGE 123

123 Objective Eight: Recommendations for Research Researchers should study adults who have terminated involvement in MG to understand reasons associated with turnover. Other state MG programs should seek to understand effects of the combined attributes of motivation orientations and efficacy in instructional strategies on Master Gardener tenure. This information would provide researchers, state and local coordinators and the broad academic discipline of Agri cultural Education if age, instructional efficacy, Learning, Socialization, Community Service, Vary Routine and Others Perceptions are variables that predict MG tenure across the U.S. All participants are perpetual learners but learners motivational dif ferences are what should be studied (Houle, 1961). The results would broaden the research and knowledge bases of Houles (1961) Typology and Banduras (1997) self -efficacy theory. This information would be beneficial to national MG program coordinators in determining MG tenure and assist Cooperative Extension in retaining volunteer educators (Meyer & Hanchek, 1997; Swackhamer & Kiernan, 2005; VanDerZanden, 2001). Objective Eight: Recommendations for Practice The revised conceptual framework illustrates th e significant interactions of age and instructi onal efficacy on MG tenure ( Figure 5 2). The significant interactions of age and Community Service, and age and Others Perceptions are illustrated in the framework. Instructional efficacy and the motivational orientations (Learning, Socialization, Vary Routine, and Others Perceptions) were significant on MG tenure. Age was the sole demographic characteristic predicting MG tenure. Older adults may participate in MG due to the time requirement (minimum 75 hou rs annually) to serve as a volunteer educator. The researcher recommended MG coordinators continually strive to market MG to adults of all ages in order to broaden the potential of including participants with diverse backgrounds in the program. Spouses tha t are homemakers or unemployed may provide

PAGE 124

124 practitioners more volunteer educators (Master Gardeners) given the time requirement. Adults too disabled for employment may offer coordinators more sources as volunteer educators. Adults instructional efficacy predicted MG tenure. This study underscores the importance of providing training and preparation in instructional strategies for current and future Master Gardeners. Clientele benefit from educators high teaching efficacy. Teachers who have robust confide nce in teaching efficacy create opportunities for learners to master the subject matter (Bandura, 1993). The findings from this studys eighth objective reinforce previous recommendations for practitioners to provide training in instructional strategies to Master Gardener volunteers. Learning, Socialization, Vary Routine, and Others Perceptions wer e significant on MG tenure ( Figure 5 2). These findings provide practitioners more insight on the motivational orientations that predict MG tenure and provide a clear -cut description of what motivates adults to participate in the program (Flagler, 1992). Understanding motivational orientations of adults is the first step in preparing an educational program to meet participant needs (Houle, 1961). Florida MG coordinators should develop an understanding of the motivational orientations presented in this study from Mergeners (1979) modified M EPS due to the fact that certain orientations predict MG tenure. The state and local coordinators should ensure the Florida M G program addresses these needs through instruction and opportunities presented participants as volunteer educators. Opportunities exist to train and prepare current and future Master Gardeners on -site of horticultural related businesses in respective cou nty MG programs. Addressing participant needs, will positively affect their continued participation (Houle). Master Gardeners continued participation provides a valuable resource to Cooperative Extension (Meyer, 1997) by enhancing the organizations abil ity to deliver educational information to the

PAGE 125

125 Figure 5 2 Altered Conceptual Framework Based upon the Studys Findings Master Gardener Tenure Instructional Efficacy Motivational Orientations Learning Age Socialization Vary Routine Others Perceptions Community Service Demographic Characteristics Of Florida Master Gardeners

PAGE 126

126 general public (Rasmussen, 1989; Steele, 1994). Opportunities exist to train adults in instruction at the statewide MG conference held annually. Even though the conference is only a one method approach, the experience would provide adults in attendance knowledge on how to utilize active, experiential and cooperative learning in educational content toward clientele in resp ective county programs. Utilizing the conference toward improving adults teaching efficacy is another example of professional development the MG state coordinator can institute for Florida Master Gardeners. Chapter Summary Result s from this chapter reinforced Houles research (1961) due to older, higher income adults are more apt to participate in continued learning. Participants were primarily learning oriented but this facet did not predict tenure in the program. Specific motivational orientations were significantly correlated with instructional efficacy indicating multiple facets may predict MG tenure. Adults in this study had a moderate level of teaching efficacy, and thus, opportunities exist to improve teaching efficacy in volunteer educator responsi bilities. Individuals may terminate involvement when efficacy is not high (Bandura, 1997). Also, moderate efficacy educators produce moderate learning outcomes. Age, instructional efficacy and various motivational orientations significantly predicated MG tenure. Instructional efficacy was the lone independent variable predicting Master Gardener tenure that MG coordinators could directly enhance through professional development, practice teaching and mentoring. Due to the importance of MG participation to the University of Florida and horticultures impact to the state of Florida, MG coordinators should work with segments of the horticultural industry to enhance instructional efficacy in MG participants.

PAGE 127

127 Summary of Research Floridas climate allows homeown ers the ability to garden most of the calendar year. Land grant universities are responsible for delivering research based information from the institution to citizens throughout the state. Cooperative Extension is the third of three components making the University of Florida a land -grant university. Master Gardeners are adult volunteer educators recruited and trained by local UF employed extension agents to teach homeowners horticultural knowledge. Due to budget shortages, the need exists to include more effective volunteer educators for UF through the MG program. The researcher employed a stratified random sample design in order to ensure a consensus on the studys eight objectives was achieved from Florida MG participants. Participants were included from each of the five Extension districts in Florida. Due to the rigor in research methods, the inclusion of advanced prediction statistics and the institution of a mail survey, findings from this study can be generalized to the entire population of Florida Ma ster Gardeners. Findings from this study indicated Florida Master Gardeners were primarily white, educated, women with moderate incomes. The researcher was surprised participants were subsequently homogenous due to the demographic make up of Floridas cit izens. Results from this study reinforced Houles research (1961) due to older, educated, higher income adults are more apt to participate in continued learning. The MG population may be homogenous due to the prerequisites needed (resources) in order to be come a Florida Master Gardener. Participants were unquestionably learning-oriented, and not goal or activity -oriented. Learning -oriented adults perceive continued learning as a duty, and believe purs u ing education will enhance their lives Goal -oriented a dults participat e in an educational program due to the realization of their need for education or because they have identified a personal interest they want to comprehend to a higher degree. An activity-oriented adult chooses an educational

PAGE 128

128 program based u pon the amount of social experiences with other adults (Houle). Florida Master Gardener were not goal nor activity oriented. Adults in this study had a moderate level of teaching efficacy, and thus, opportunities exist to improve teaching efficacy in volu nteer educator responsibilities. This indicates adults may quit serving as a volunteer educator due to a lack of confidence in the role. Individuals may terminate involvement when efficacy is not high (Bandura, 1997). Also, moderate efficacy educators produce moderate learning outcomes. These facets underscore a tremendous need to provide opportunities to develop improved teaching abilities. When demographic characteristics, motivational orientations and instructional efficacy were tested to predict MG tenu re, interesting results were produced. Learning, which was identified as the reason adults flocked to MG, was found to be negatively related to tenure. This facet insinuates that adults learn what they want then terminate their involvement. Instructional efficacy was the lone var iable predicting MG tenure that MG coordinators could directly enhance through professional development in active and experiential learning practice teaching, and mentoring. Improving Master Gardeners teaching efficacy will broad en the scope of the University of Florida by retaining more qualified adult volunteer educators in order to deliver research -based horticultural knowledge to local constituents, and thus, expand the impact of UF IFAS/Extension. The annual Florida MG confer ence is a venue to enhance instructional efficacy in participants. Due to the importance of MG participat ion to the UF and horticultures impact to the state of Florida, MG coordinators should work with segments of the horticultural industry to enhance par ticipants instructional efficacy through active learning experiences

PAGE 129

129 APPENDIX A PERMISSION FORMS

PAGE 130

130 University of Florida Agricultural Education and Communication P.O. Box 110540 Gainesville, Fl. 32611 0540 Ph: 3523921663 Email: strong@ufl.edu July 1 3 th 2009 To: Michael A Mergener, RPh, PhD Re: Use of scale for my dissertation Hello! I spoke to you on the telephone on Tuesday, July 7th about using your scale for my dissertation. I am researching reasons that adults are motivated to participate in a homeowner gardening program that requires them to donate a minimum of 75 volunteers hours annually. Thank you for allowing me to use your scale to answer my research question! Please feel free to contact me at 352-275-4964 or strong@ufl.edu if you have questions. Sincerely, Robert Strong Doctoral Student University of Florida Department of Agricultural Education and Communication

PAGE 131

131

PAGE 132

132 APPENDIX B SURVEY INSTRUMENTS

PAGE 133

133

PAGE 134

134

PAGE 135

135

PAGE 136

136

PAGE 137

137

PAGE 138

138 APPENDIX C LETTERS TO PARTICIPANTS

PAGE 139

139

PAGE 140

140

PAGE 141

141

PAGE 142

142 LIST OF REFERENCES Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (2009). Statistical methods for the social sciences (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (1997). Statistical methods for the social sciences Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Ahl, H. (2005). Motivation in adult education: A problem solver or a euphemism for direction and control? International Journal of Lifelong Education, 25(4), 385405. Allen, B. F. (1986). Motivat ional orientations of black graduate students at North Carolina State University (minorities). Dissertation Abstracts International, 46( 09), 2517A. (UMI No. 8518220) Atkinson, H. T. (1990). Factors motivating and deterring adults to participate in Christi an education opportunities in Christian and Missionary Alliance churches of the South Pacific District of United States. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51( 02), 379A. (UMI No. 9016045) Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., Razavieh, A., & Sorenson, C. (2006). In troduction to research in education (7th ed.). Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace & Company. Babbie, E. (2007). The practice of social research (11th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Babbie, E. (1990). Survey research methods (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Ba ndura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control New York, NY: W. H. Freeman and Company. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self -efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117148. Bandura, A. (1992). Exer cise of personal agency through the self -efficacy mechanism. In R. Schwarzer (Ed.), Self-efficacy: Thought control of action (pp. 3 38). Washington, DC: Hemisphere. Bandura, A. (1991). Self -regulation of motivation through anticipatory and self regulatory mechanisms. In R. A. Dienstbier (Ed.), Perspectives on motivation: Nebraska symposium on motivation (Vol. 38, pp. 69164). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory E nglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Barbuto, Jr., J. E., Trout, S. K., & Brown, L. L. (2004). Identifying sources of motivation of adult rural workers University of Nebraska, Lincoln Faculty Publications: Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communic ation Department.

PAGE 143

143 Barry Cybulski M. A. (1991). The effects of demographic variables and life changes on the participation of adults in staff development programs. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52( 02), 390A. (UMI No. 9118851) Bartlett II, J. E., Kotrlik, J. W., & Higgins, C. C. (2001). Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size in survey research. Information Technology, Learning and Performance Journal, 19(1), 43 50. Baxter, N. D. H. (1990). Ol der adult learners: The relationships among motives for participation and curriculum planning processes. Dissertation Abstracts International, 50( 07), 1911A. (UMI No. 8921877) Bobbitt, V. (1997). The Washington State University Master Gardener program: Cultivating plants, people, and communities for 25 years. HortTechnology, 7(4), 345347. Boccolucci N. J. (1992). Effects of incentives on motives to participate in insurance continuing education activities. Dissertation Abstracts International, 53(06), 1738A. (UMI No. 9228020) Boshier, R. (1991). Psychometric properties of the alternative form of the education participation scale. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3), 150167. Boshier, R., & Collins, J. B. (1985). The Houle typology after twenty two years: A large scale empirical test. Adult Education Quarterly, 35(3), 113130. Boshier, R. W., & Collins, J. B. (1983). Education Participation Scale for factor structure and socio demographic correlates for 12,000 learners. In ternational Journal of Lifelong Education, 2, 163177. Boshier, R. (1977). Motivational orientations re -visited: Life -Space motives and the Education Participation Scale. Adult Education Quarterly, 27(2), 89 115. Boshier, R. (1971). Motivational orientat ions of adult education participants: A factor analytic exploration of Houles typology. Adult Education Journal, 21(2), 3 -26. Boyd, B. L. (2004). Extension agents as administrators of volunteers: Competencies needed for the future. Journal of Extension, 42(4). Retrieved June 8, 2009, from http://www.joe.org/joe/2004april/a4.php Boyer, R., Waliczek, T. M., & Zajicek, J. M. (2002). The Master Gardening program: Do benefits of the program go beyond improving the horticultural knowledge of the participants? HortTechnology 12(3), 432436. Brouwers, A., & Tomic, W. (2003). A test of the factorial validity of the Teacher Efficacy Scale. Research in Education, 69, 67 79.

PAGE 144

144 Brown, B. J. (1987). An exploratory study of motivational characteristics of adult distanc e telecourse learners. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47( 04), 2951A. (UMI No. 8625513) Brudney, J. L. (1999). The effective use of volunteers: Best practices for the public sector. Law and Contemporary Problems, 62(4), 219255. Capa, Y. (2005). F actors influencing first year teachers sense of efficacy. Dissertation Abstracts International, 66(01), 143A. (UMI No. 3161113) Carr, S. (1982). The continuing learner: An exploration into the relationship between values and motives for participation in a dult education courses Dissertation Abstracts International, 42( 12), 1008A. (UMI No. 8211584) Cherwony, K. K. (1982). A multivariate analysis of participation in non -credit university courses. Dissertation Abstracts International, 43(04), 1008A. (UMI No. 8217728) Cheung, H. Y. (2008). Teacher efficacy: A comparative study of Hong Kong and Shanghai primary in -service teachers. The Australian Educational Researcher, 35(1), 103123. Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). New York, NY: John W iley & Sons. Cohen, S. B. (2004). The utility of Probabilistic Models to oversample policy relevant population subgroups that are subject to transitions Paper presented at the 58th annual meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, P hoenix, AZ Cohen, J. (1998). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates. Collins, C. C., & Layne, K. L. (2003). Recruiting volunteers to teach a community -based wellness program: Seniors CAN University of Nevada Cooperative Extension, SP 0301. Corporation for National and Community Service (2006). Strategic plan 2006-2010. Publication CNS328. Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in Exploratory Factor Analysis: Four reco mmendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation, 10(7), 1 9. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16 297334. Davis, J. (1971). Elementary survey analysis Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

PAGE 145

145 Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2009). Internet mail and mixed-mode surveys: The Tailored Design Method (3rd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and internet surveys: The Tailored Design Method (2nd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Dorn, S., & Relf, P. D. (2000). The transition from state and local funding for Virginia Master Gardener volunteer management. HortTechnology, 10(1), 77 81. Dorph, E., Wik L., & Steen, P. A. (2003). Dispatcher assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation: An evaluation of efficacy among the elderly. Resuscitation, 56 265273. Duncan, D., & Ricketts, J. (2006). Total program efficacy: A comparison of traditionally and alternat ively certified agriculture teachers Paper presented at the 33rd Annual National Agricultural Education Research Conference, Charlotte, NC. Dunham, J. K., & Songony, D. (2008). Teacher efficacy in rural Zimbabwe. Research in Comparative and International Education 3 (4), 404412. Edlow, M. D. (1983). Motivational orientations of participants in Elderhostels. Dissertation Abstracts International, 44(06), 1712A. (UMI No. 8323277) Ensley, T. L. (1987). Relationship between adults' reasons for participation in noncredit classes in community colleges in Texas and temporal orientation (time perspective). Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(08), 2848A. (UMI No. 8625387) Etkin, C. D., Prohaska, T. R., Harris, B. A., Latham, N., & Jette, A. (2006). Feasibi lity of implementing the Strong for Life program in community settings. The Gerontologist, 46(2), 284292. Extension Committee on Organization and Policys Leadership Advisory Council. (2007). 2007 Report. Washington, D.C.: National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges. Extension Committee on Organization and Policys Leadership Advisory Council. (2006). 2006 Report. Washington, D.C.: National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges. Farmer, C. M. (2008). Differe nces in learning motivations of professionals and nonprofessionals participating in two south Mississippi Institutes for Learning in Retirement. Dissertation Abstracts International, 69(08), 2009A. (UMI No. 3326705) Finch, C. R. (1997). Profile of an acti ve Master Gardener chapter. HortTechnology, 7(4), 371376. Fink, A. (1995). The survey handbook Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

PAGE 146

146 Fisher, C. J. (1986). Motivational orientations of adult learner age 60+ based on Houle's Typology (Older, Boshier, Education Part icipation Scale). Dissertation Abstracts International, 46(09), 2520A. (UMI No. 8523665) Flagler, J. S. (1992). Master Gardeners and horticultural therapy. HortTechnology, 2(2), 249250. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (2007). Fl orida Agricultural Statistics Retrieved June 2, 2008, from http://www.florida agriculture.com/pubs/pubform/pdf/Florida -Agriculture -Statistics Brochure.pdf Gale, J. C. (1991). An investigation of adult learner characteristics and their relationship to rea sons for program participation and program commitment in higher education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52(04), 1952B. (UMI No. 9127220) Gallagher, M. P. (1985). A motivational study of persisters and dropouts in a small group religious education program. Dissertation Abstracts International, 45(10), 3033A. (UMI No. 8414235) Garofolo, P. L. (1996). Motivations and life satisfaction of participants in Institutes for Learning in Retirement programs: Great Lakes region. Dissertation Abstracts Intern ational, 56(07), 2527A. (UMI No. 9538177) Garrett, C. L. J. (1984). Adult women entering nursing: Motivational factors and personality orientations. Dissertation Abstracts International, 44(11), 3358B. (UMI No. 8403257) Garst, W. C., & Ried, L. D. (1999) Motivational orientations: Evaluation of the Education Participation Scale. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 63(3), 300304. Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 56 9 582. Goad, C. K. H. (1984). Motives and motivations of re -entry women students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 44(10), 2952A. (UMI No. 8401199) Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure an d impact on student achievement. American Education Research Journal, 37(2), 479507. Gourley, G. A. (1983). Motivational orientations of students in two Nebraska community colleges. Dissertation Abstracts International, 44(05), 1294A. (UMI No. 8322485)

PAGE 147

147 Harper, D. A. (1994). Adults in higher education: Motives, antecedents and consequences, and coping strategies. Dissertation Abstracts International, 55(05), 1225A. (UMI No. 9426738) Heintzelman T. D. (1989). Adult conc ert band participation in the United States. Dissertation Abstracts International, 50(02), 381A. (UMI No. 8909091) Heneman III, H. G., Kimball, S., & Milanowski, A. (2006). The Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale: Validation evidence and behavioral prediction. Wisconsin Center for Education Research. Retrieved June 2nd, 2009, from http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/publications/workingPapers/papers.php Henson, R. K., Kogan, L. R., & Vacha Hasse, T. (2001). A reliability generalization study of the teacher efficacy scal e and related instruments. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61(3), 404420. Hoover, T., & Connor, N. J. (2001). Preferred learning styles of Florida Association for Family and Community Education volunteers: Implications for professional develop ment. Journal of Extension, 39(3). Retrieved December 15, 2008 from http://www.joe.org/joe/2001june/a3.html Houle, C. O. (1961). The inquiring mind. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Irwin, M. J. (1996). Motivational orientations for participa tion in continuing nursing education by registered nurses living in rural Texas. Dissertation Abstracts International, 57(06), 2009B. (UMI No. 3326705) Israel, G. D. (1992). Determining Sample Size Program Evaluation and Organizational Development, IFAS U niversity of Florida. PEOD 6. Ives, M. E. L. (2003). Professional development for support staff: Time well spent. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64(010), 3582A. (UMI No. NQ85193) Jansen, D. J. (2008). Validation of an instrument for mathematics en hancement teaching efficacy of Pacific Northwest agricultural educators. Dissertation Abstracts International, 69(01), 71A. (UMI No. 3295626) Johnson, D. W. (1987). A study of law enforcement officers' participation in continuing education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(07), 2418A. (UMI No. 8624657) Kagan, A., Black, S. E., Duchan, J. F., Simmons -Mackie, N., & Square, P. (2001). Training volunteers as conversation partners using supported conversation with adults with aphasia (SCA): A control led trial. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 44 624638.

PAGE 148

148 Kelsey, K. D. (2007). Overcoming gender bias with self -efficacy: A case study of women agricultural education teachers and preservice students. Journal of Agricultural Education, 48 (1), 52 64. Kim, M. (2005). Influence of individual difference factors on volunteer willingness to be trained. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(07), 2763A. (UMI No. 3141658) Kirsch, E., & VanDerZanden, A. M. (2002). Demographics and volunteer experiences of Oregon Master Gardeners. HortTechnology, 12(3), 505 508. Klassen, R. A. et al. (2009). Exploring the validity of teachers self -efficacy scale in five countries. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 67 76. Knoblach, N. A., & Whittin gton, M. S. (2003). Differences in teacher efficacy related to career commitment of novice agriculture teachers. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 20(1), 87 98. Knobloch, N. A., & Whittington, M. S. (2002). Novice teachers perceptions of suppor t, teacher preparation quality, and student teaching experience related to teacher efficacy. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 27(3), 331341. Knoblach, N. (2006). Exploring relationships of teachers sense of efficacy in two student teaching pro grams. Journal of Agricultural Education, 47(2), 36 47. Knobloch, N. A. (2002). A comparison of personal factors, environmental factors, and student teachers efficacy between two agricultural education student teacher programs Paper presented at the 29th Annual National Agricultural Education Research Conference, Las Vegas, NV. Knobloch, N. A. (2001). The influence of peer teaching and early field experience on teacher efficacy beliefs of preservice educators in agriculture Paper presented at the 28th Annual National Agricultural Education Research Conference, New Orleans, LA. Kolner, S. M. (1983). Effects of goals and expectations on participation in adult vocational supplemental education programs. Dissertation Abstracts International, 44(06), 1664A. (UMI No. 8323293) Kremer, A. L. (2006). Predictors of participation in formal and informal workplace learning: Demographic, situational, motivational and deterrent factors. Dissertation Abstracts International, 66(11), 3893A. (UMI No. 3194520) Kreszock M. H. (1994). A study of the motivational orientations of autodidactic adult learners. Dissertation Abstracts International, 55(03), 446A. (UMI No. 9421648)

PAGE 149

149 Lenick, M. A. A. (1986). An assessment of the motivations of non traditional women students in postsecondary education (re -entry, institutions, returning). Dissertation Abstracts International, 46(08), 2164A. (UMI No. 8514218) Lindner, J. R., Murphy, T. H., & Briers, G. E. (2001). Handling nonresponse in social sci ence research. Journal of Agricultural Education, 42(4), 43 53. Long, J. A. (1982). Participation motivational orientations of adults enrolled in GED preparation and credit high school completion programs. Dissertation Abstracts International, 43(06), 1794A. (UMI No. 8225476) Lopez, M. et al. (1999). Building community collaboration for lead safety education: Extension educators take the lead. Journal of Extension, 37(1). Retrieved December 15, 2008, from http://www.joe.org/joe/1999february/a2.html Mangu bat, M. D. B. (2005). Motivational orientations and participation barriers of registered nurses who pursue advanced education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 66(05), 2515B. (UMI No. 3176764) McCullagh, P., & Nelder, J. A. (1983). Generalized Linear Models London, England: Chapman and Hall, Inc. McKenna, P. G. (1985). The motivational orientations of participants in public school non credit vocational and avocational adult education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 45(08), 2356A. (UMI No. 8425756) Mergener, M. A. (1979).The motivational orientations of pharmacists toward continuing education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 39(08), 3775B. (UMI No. 7820638) Merriam, S.B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L.M. (2006). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass Inc., Pub. Meyer, M. H. (1997). Master Gardener projects -making connections. HortTechnology, 7(4), 339344. Meyer, M. H. (2004). Why Master Gardeners stop volunteering: Lack of time. Ho rtTechnology, 14(3), 437438. Miller, S. D. (1996). Females in postsecondary technical education: Factors influencing participation. Dissertation Abstracts International, 56(10), 3819A. (UMI No. 9602817) Miller, B. E. (1991). Participant motivation and satisfaction with off -campus agricultural credit programs. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52(06), 1991A. (UMI No. 9126225)

PAGE 150

150 Mittlbck & M., & Waldhr, T. (2000). Adjustment for R -measures for Poisson regression models. Computation Statistics and Data Analysis, 34 461472. Moravec, C. (2006). Continuing education interests of Master Gardener Volunteers: Beyond basic training. Journal of Extension, 44(6) Retrieved December 15, 2008, from http://www.joe.org/joe/2006december/rb5.shtml Morstain, B. R ., & Smart, J. C. (1974). Reasons in participation in adult education courses: A multi -variate analysis of group differences. Adult Education Quarterly, 24(2), 83 98. National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges (2008). The Land-Gran t Tradition Retrieved June 17, 2008, from http://www.aplu.org/NetCommunity/Document.Doc?id=780 Nishikawa H. A. (1988). The association between recent life events and educational participation of professional career wome n in nursing. Dissertation Abstracts International, 49(05), 1036A. (UMI No. 8804363) Oetman, P. A. (1991). A comparative study of the motivations of Seventh-day Adventist professional ministers for continuing education participation. Dissertation Abstract s International, 51(08), 2777A. (UMI No. 9028674) Okafor, B. C. (1997). The relationship between selected factors influencing inmates' decisions to participate in educational programs. Dissertation Abstracts International, 57(07), 2804A. (UMI No. 9639889) Osborne, E. W. (Ed.) (n.d.). National research agenda: Agricultural education and communication, 2007-2010. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, Department of Agricultural Education and Communication. Ozer, E. & Bandura, A. (1990). Mechanisms governi ng empowerment effects: A self efficacy analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 472486. Pai, H. S. (1990). The relationship between the motives for and barriers to participation in American graduate schools of theology, religious ori entation and religious status of Korean American pastors. Dissertation Abstracts International 51(05), 1650A. (UMI No. 9026908) Palmer, R. E. (1991). The relationship of educational participation to levels of career development. Dissertation Abstracts In ternational 51(10), 3305A. (UMI No. 9031127) Peronto, M., & Murphy, B. (2009). How Master Gardeners view and apply their training: A preliminary study. Journal of Extension, 47(3). Retrieved June 29, 2008, from http://joe.org/joe/2009june/pdf/JOE_v47_3rb 2.pdf

PAGE 151

151 Pfeifer, D. M. (1996). Ethnicity and adult students' motivations to participate in higher education at an urban college. Dissertation Abstracts International 56(08), 2960A. (UMI No. 9544370) Phillips III, W., & Bradshaw, J. (1999). Florida Master Gardener Mentor Program: A case study. Journal of Extension, 37(4). Retrieved June 5, 2009, from http://www.joe.org/joe/1999august/rb3.php Phipps, T. C. (1987). Adult learners' reasons for participation in a nontraditional degree program. Dissertation Ab stracts International 47(08), 2852A. (UMI No. 8628580) Polomski, R. F., Johnson, K. M., & Anderson, J. C. (1997). Prison inmates become Master Gardeners in South Carolina. HortTechnology, 7(4), 360 362. Rasmussen, W. D. (1989). Taking the university to the people: seventy -five years of Cooperative Extension. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press. Rebok, G., Carlson, et al. (2004). Short term impact of experience Corps: Participation on children and schools: Results from a pilot randomized trial. Journal of Urban Health, 81(1), 79 93. Reiners, S., Nichnadowicz, J., Nitzsche, P. J., & Bachelder, S. (1991). Using Master Gardeners to evaluate home garden tomato varieties. HortTechnology, 1, 136. Relf, D., & McDaniel, A. (1994). Assessing Master Gardener priorities. HortTechnology, 4 (2), 181184. Ren, W., Vanderhorst, A., Loadman, W., Moore, R. & Edington, J. (2008). Analyzing teacher efficacy using confirmatory factor analysis and Rasch modeling: The impact of methodology and context in understanding te achers sense of efficacy Paper presented at the 17th annual meeting of the MidWestern Educational Research Association, Columbus, OH. Rexroad, T. D. (2003). Evaluation of marketing methods used to promote extension programs as perceived by Master Garde ners in West Virginia. Manuscript Abstract International, 41(04), (UMI No. 1409750) Reynolds, M. M. (1986). The self -directedness and motivational orientation of adult part time students at a community college. Dissertation Abstracts International 46(12) 3571A. (UMI No. 8524440) Richardson, A. J. (2000). Behavior mechanisms of non-response in mailback travel surveys Paper presented at the 79th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.

PAGE 152

152 Roberts, T. G., Harlin, J. F., & Rickett s, J. C. (2006). A longitudinal examination of teaching efficacy of agricultural science student teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 47(2), 81 92. Rocca, S. J., & Washburn, S. G. (2006). Comparison of teacher efficacy among traditionally and alt ernatively certified agriculture teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 47(3), 5869. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press. Rohs, F. R., Stribilng, J. H., & Westerfield, R. R. (2002). What personally attracts volunteers to the Master Gardener Program? Journal of Extension, 40(4). Retrieved July 13, 2008 from http://www.joe.org/joe/2002august/rb5.shtml Rohs, F. R. & Westerfield, R. R. (1996). Factors influencing volunteering in the Master Gardener Pro gram. HortTechnology 6 (3), 281285. Rost, R. C. (1997). A study of the effectiveness of using distance education to present training programs to Extension Service Master Gardener trainees. Dissertation Abstracts International 58(05), 1543A. (UMI No. 9734849) Rouse, S. B., & Clawson, B. (1992). Motives and incentives of older adult volunteers. Journal of Extension, 30(3). Retrieved December 15, 2008, from http://www.joe.org/joe/1992fall/a1.html Ruppert, K. C., Bradshaw, J., & Stewart, A. Z. (1997). The Florida Master Gardener program: History, use and trends. HortTechnology, 7(4), 348353. Russett, K. C. (1999). Learning projects and motivational factors among older adults participating in an Institute for Learning in Retirement program. Dissertation Ab stracts International 59(08), 2818A. (UMI No. 9901348) Salkind, N. J. (1997). Exploring research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Savanick, M. A., & Boyd, R. B. (2005). Assessing the need for Master Naturalist programs. Journal of Exten sion, 43(3). Retrieved June 5, 2009, from http://www.joe.org/joe/2005june/a7.php Schott, N. J. (2001). Volunteer motivation and satisfaction associated with the University of Illinois Extension Master Gardener program. Dissertation Abstracts International 61(10), 3847A. (UMI No. 9990131) Schrock, D. S., Meyer, M., Ascher, P., & Synder, M. (2000). Benefits and values of the Master Gardener program. Journal of Extension, 38(1). Retrieved July 13, 2008, from http://www.joe.org/joe/2000february/rb2.html

PAGE 153

153 Schr ock, D. S. (1999). A functional approach to understanding and assessing the motivation and retention of university extension Master Gardener volunteers. Dissertation Abstracts International 59(12), 6508B. (UMI No. 9913378) Scott, D. J. (1989). Traditiona l and reentry women nursing majors: Motivational factors, vocational personalities, barriers and enablers to participation. Dissertation Abstracts International 50(05), 1183A. (UMI No. 8917881) Seevers, B., Graham, D., & Conklin, N. (2007). Education thr ough Cooperative Extension (2nd ed.). Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers. Shavelson, R. J. (1996). Statistical reasoning for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Simonson, D. L., & Pals, D. A. (1990). Master Gardeners: Views from the cabbage patch. Journal of Extension, 28(2). Retrieved July 13, 2008, from http://www.joe.org/joe/1990summer/rb3.html Smith, T. J. (2005). Ethnic and gender differences in community service participation among working adults. Journal of Extension, 43(2). Retrieved December 15, 2008, from http://www.joe.org/joe/2005april/rb1.shtml Smith, A. F. (1985). Factors affecting motivation for learning: Wichita State University traditional and adult students and community residents (Kansas). Dissertation Abs tracts International, 45(08), 2415A. (UMI No. 8424342) Spell, G. M. (1989). Motivational factors and selected sociodemographic characteristics of Georgia community chorus participants as measured by the Education Participation Scale, the Community Chorus Participation Scale, and the Personal Inventory Form. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51(02), 445A. (UMI No. 9018368) Sprouse, B. M. (1982). Motivations for older adult participation in age -segregated and age integrated continuing education. Dissert ation Abstracts International, 42(07), 2973A. (UMI No. 8116676) Sprouse, B. M. (1981). Participation motivations of older adult learners. Proceedings of the Association for Gerontology in Higher Education, USA, 23. Steele, D. L. (1994). Volunteer leader inventory Rotary training guide. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN. Stouse, L., & Marr, C. (1992). Retaining Master Gardener volunteers. HortTechnology, 2(2), 244245.

PAGE 154

154 Stripling, C., Ricketts, J. C., Roberts, T. G., & Harlin, J. F. (2008). Preservic e agricultural education teachers sense of teaching self -efficacy. Journal of Agricultural Education, 49(4), 120130. Sutton, E. A. (2006). An evaluation of the Master Gardener program in Arkansas. Manuscript Abstract International, 44(05), (UMI No. EP15 456) Swackhamer, E., & Kiernan, N. E. (2005). A multipurpose evaluation strategy for Master Gardener Training Programs. Journal of Extension, 43(6). Retrieved June 5, 2009, from http://www.joe.org/joe/2005december/a4.php Thomas, C. M. (1984). Motivationa l orientations of Kansas nurses participating in continuing education in a mandatory state for relicensure. Dissertation Abstracts International, 44(12), 3578A. (UMI No. 8407692) Towers, K. A. (2003). Factors that influence the public health workforce par ticipation in continuing education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64(11), 5434B. (UMI No. 3110945) Trainin, G., & Andrezejczak, N. (2006). Readers theatre: A viable reading strategy? Paper presented at the American Educational Research Associatio n meeting. San Diego, CA. Tschannen -Moran, M. (2000). The development of a new measure of teacher efficacy. Paper presented at the 68th annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Tschannen -Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783805. Tschannen -Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, K. W. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68, 202248. United States Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service (2007). 2007 Census Publications: Market Value of Agricultural Products Retrieved June 2, 2008, from http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census02/volume1/fl/index1.htm UF IFA S/Extension (2008). About Extension Retrieved June 16, 2008, from http://www.solutionsforyourlife.com/about/ University of Florida Master Gardener Program (2008). About the Master Gardener Program Retrieved June 16, 2008, http://gardeningsolutions.ifas. ufl.edu/mastergardener/about/become.shtml Utendorf, J. M. (1985). The motivational orientations of participants in Roman Catholic Lay Ministry training programs. Dissertation Abstracts International, 46(05), 1241A. (UMI No. NK65308)

PAGE 155

155 VanDerZanden, A.M. ( 2001). Ripple effect training: Multiplying Extension's resources with veteran Master Gardeners as MG trainers. Journal of Extension, 39(3). Retrieved June 29, 2009, from http://www.joe.org/joe/2001june/rb1.php Wai, D. M. E. (1993). What motivates nurses to participate in continuing education? Manuscript Abstracts International, 31(04), 1436. (UMI No. 1351916) Waliczek, T. M., Zajicek, J. M., & Lineberger, R. D. (2005). The influence of gardening activities on consumer perceptions of life satisfaction. Ho rtScience, 40(5), 13601365. Waring, P. J. S. (1995). Legal education: An inquiry into demographics and motivations of students entering law school. Dissertation Abstracts International, 56(06), 2140A. (UMI No. 9536730) Westbrook, T. S. (1991). A study of the extent to which adults' motivational learning orientations change during their first term of college enrollment. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51(09), 2961A. (UMI No. 9103277) Wolford, M., Cox, K. & Culp III, K. (2001). Effective motivators for master volunteer program development. Journal of Extension, 39(2). Retrieved July 13, 2008, from http://www.joe.org/joe/2001april/rb4.html Zheng, D., Brewer, R., Young, M., Wagner, M., Hee Seo, J. (2006). Attitude and self efficacy change: English language learning in virtual environments Paper presented at the 2006 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

PAGE 156

156 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Robert Lee Strong Jr. was born on November 16, 1973 in Lebanon, Tennessee. An onl y child, he grew up mostly in Lebanon, graduating from Lebanon High School in 1992. He earned his B.S. in animal s cience from Middle Tennessee St ate University and his M.S. in extension e ducation from the University of Tennessee in 1996 and 2001, respectiv ely. Upon graduating i n August 1996 with his B.S. in animal s cience, Robert began working for the University of Tennessee Agricultural Extension Service as an extension agent for Fentress County, Tennessee in November 1996. After working in that position for three years, Robert transferred to Putnam County, Tennessee w h ere he was an extension agent serving the 4 H program in 2000. Robert remained in Putnam County for three years and then moved to Orlando, Florida. He served as the 4 H Program Leader for Orange County (Orlando), Florida from 2003 2007. After a very successful stint in Orange County w h ere Robert was responsible for mentoring less seasoned extension agents, he decided to enroll in courses designed to earn a doctoral degree in Extension Educ ation at the University of Florida. His primary motive was to learn how to better prepare future extension agents in program planning and evaluation, time management, and working with local constituents. After much deliberation about jumping into a Ph. D. full time, he decided to apply for an assistantship in the Department of Agricultural Education and Communication. Robert left Extension, an or ganization he served for over ten years, to become a full -time Ph.D. stude nt in the fall of 2007. He graduate d in May 2010, with a Ph.D. in agricultural e ducation and c ommunication from the University of Florida.