<%BANNER%>

Factors Influencing Leadership in Collegiate Agricultural Organizations

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042933/00001

Material Information

Title: Factors Influencing Leadership in Collegiate Agricultural Organizations The Role of Gender
Physical Description: 1 online resource (75 p.)
Language: english
Creator: ANDREWS,ANDREA LAUREN
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: AGRICULTURAL -- COLLEGIATE -- GENDER -- INFLUENCE -- LEADERSHIP -- MOTIVATION -- ORGANIZATIONS -- STUDENT
Agricultural Education and Communication -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Agricultural Education and Communication thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: FACTORS INFLUENCING LEADERSHIP IN COLLEGIATE AGRICULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS: THE ROLE OF GENDER This study examined the sources of motivation among collegiate leaders, focusing on gender differences. Furthermore, the study sought to understand what the sources of motivation among collegiate leaders were, the differences between male and female collegiate leaders, and the strength of motivation and relationships between race/ethnicity, leadership experience, and leadership courses taken by the student leader. Theoretical framework included Leonard, Beauvais, and Scholl?s Self Concept-Based Work Motivation model (1999). The research design was descriptive survey and the population included AAAE?s Southern Region College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Land-Grant University Ambassador Teams (n=177). The study found that male collegiate leaders were motivated Instrumentally, indicating that gender can impact whether or not the student is Instrumentally motivated. The majority of ambassador teams were White/non-Hispanic females that were primarily identified with an intrinsic source of motivation. The study also uncovered that over half of the ambassadors actively take part in their College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Leadership courses.
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 ANDREA LAUREN ANDREWS.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Stedman, Nicole LaMee Perez.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0042933:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042933/00001

Material Information

Title: Factors Influencing Leadership in Collegiate Agricultural Organizations The Role of Gender
Physical Description: 1 online resource (75 p.)
Language: english
Creator: ANDREWS,ANDREA LAUREN
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: AGRICULTURAL -- COLLEGIATE -- GENDER -- INFLUENCE -- LEADERSHIP -- MOTIVATION -- ORGANIZATIONS -- STUDENT
Agricultural Education and Communication -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Agricultural Education and Communication thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: FACTORS INFLUENCING LEADERSHIP IN COLLEGIATE AGRICULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS: THE ROLE OF GENDER This study examined the sources of motivation among collegiate leaders, focusing on gender differences. Furthermore, the study sought to understand what the sources of motivation among collegiate leaders were, the differences between male and female collegiate leaders, and the strength of motivation and relationships between race/ethnicity, leadership experience, and leadership courses taken by the student leader. Theoretical framework included Leonard, Beauvais, and Scholl?s Self Concept-Based Work Motivation model (1999). The research design was descriptive survey and the population included AAAE?s Southern Region College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Land-Grant University Ambassador Teams (n=177). The study found that male collegiate leaders were motivated Instrumentally, indicating that gender can impact whether or not the student is Instrumentally motivated. The majority of ambassador teams were White/non-Hispanic females that were primarily identified with an intrinsic source of motivation. The study also uncovered that over half of the ambassadors actively take part in their College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Leadership courses.
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 ANDREA LAUREN ANDREWS.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Stedman, Nicole LaMee Perez.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0042933:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

FACTORS INFLUENCING LEADERSHIP IN COLLEGIATE AGRICULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS: TH E ROLE OF GENDER By ANDREA LAUREN ANDREWS A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORID A IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2011 1

PAGE 2

2011 Andrea Lauren Andrews 2

PAGE 3

To Meme & Papa Andrews, who instilled in me a love for agriculture and a desire to serve others 3

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To the amazing individuals who supported me while completing this study, I would like to say thank you. First, to my parent s, thank you for the encouragement, love and support that has always driven me to lead a life of purpose. You have taught me the importance of being passionate a bout what you do, and learning that we each set our own limits. Without these lessons I would not be where I am today and able to proudly present such an accomplishment. To Sondra, Parker, Chason, and Alex, thank you for the love lessons and laughter throughout the years. To Meme and Papa Andrews, thank you for instilling in me a love for the family farm as well as teaching me the importance in the future of agriculture. To Aunt Tammy Tara, John & Dayle, thank you for a tight knit and supportive family unit throughout this experience. To Mimi and Pawpaw Trum, thank you for your open arms, kindness, and love To all of my family, you have been such a blessing through this experience of higher education, and I love you all. Next, I would like to say thank you to my committee members who made this accomplishment possible. Since first meet ing Dr. Stedman in undergraduate leadership courses, she has always been a woman I look to as an example and mentor. Dr. Stedman has spent countless hours offering mu ch needed advice, comfort, direction, and encouragement. Her love and passion for her students and the field of education always shines through her enthusiasm and dedica tion. She has been an integral part of this process. Thank you for offering me t he opportunity to learn from you and for always greeting me with a warm smile and willingness to help. To Dr. Gifford, it has been a joy assisti ng you in teaching various leadership courses, thank you for allowing me to gain experience by lecturin g and helping facilitate classes. Thank you for believing in me and my ability as a researcher and to be 4

PAGE 5

successful in this graduate program, it means a lot. To Dr. Pracht, I would like to say thank you for your enthusiasm and encouragem ent. From first seeing your Strenghts presentation, I knew you were someone wh o was passionate about what they do and wanted you to be a part of my committee team. I would like to recognize Dr. Osborne, thank you for giving me an opportunity to study at the number one Agricultural Education and Communications department in t he nation. Thank you for challenging me to conduct a study that is purposeful and can make a difference. To all my AEC Rolfs and McCarty officemates, thank you for surrounding me with encouragement, laughter, and love throughout this experience I wish each of you the best! To Loren, Morgan, Becca, Erin, Adrienn e, Allison, Melissa, and Ashlyn, the wonderful women who give me strength, laughter, and remind me to live life to the fullest, thank you. Also to Brady, Karl, and Ja son, I would like to say thank you to each of you for being there for me in your unique and caring ways. Lastly, I would like to say thank you to Adam, a man that has helped me through the most challenging times and doubtful moments in this process, and have proven to be my fortress of strength and I love you. 5

PAGE 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDG MENTS .................................................................................................. 4LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ 8LIST OF FI GURES .......................................................................................................... 9ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... 10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUC TION .................................................................................................... 11History of Female Leadersh ip ................................................................................. 12Female Leadership in Colleges of Ag ricultural and Life Sciences .......................... 13Research Pr oblem .................................................................................................. 14Purpose and Objectives .......................................................................................... 14Significance of Study .............................................................................................. 15Agricultural Leadership ..................................................................................... 16Agricultural Education in Univ ersity and Postsecondary Settings ..................... 16Definitions of terms ................................................................................................. 16Limitations of the Study ........................................................................................... 17Basic assump tions .................................................................................................. 18Summary ................................................................................................................ 182 REVIEW OF THE LITERATU RE ............................................................................ 19Motivation Theory ................................................................................................... 20Theoretical Fr amewor k ........................................................................................... 21Conceptual Fr amewor k ........................................................................................... 23Gender Differences in Leadersh ip .................................................................... 24Females in the Agriculture I ndustry .................................................................. 26College of Agricultural and Li fe Sciences Leadership ...................................... 28Collegiate Ambassa dor Team s ........................................................................ 29Conceptual Model ................................................................................................... 29Summary ................................................................................................................ 313 RESEARCH METHODS ......................................................................................... 31Research Design .................................................................................................... 32Populati on ............................................................................................................... 33Data Coll ection ....................................................................................................... 33Instrument ation ....................................................................................................... 35Data Anal ysis .......................................................................................................... 36Summary ................................................................................................................ 36 6

PAGE 7

4 RESULT S ............................................................................................................... 37Demographi cs ......................................................................................................... 38Gender ............................................................................................................. 38Age ................................................................................................................... 38Race/Ethni city .................................................................................................. 39Class classifi cation ........................................................................................... 40Leadership Exper ience ..................................................................................... 40Leadership Education ....................................................................................... 41Objectiv e 1 .............................................................................................................. 42Objectiv e 2 .............................................................................................................. 45Objectiv e 3 .............................................................................................................. 465 CONCLUSIONS AND RE CCOMENDATIONS ....................................................... 50Purpose and Objectives ................................................................................... 50Methodolog y ..................................................................................................... 50Summary of Findings .............................................................................................. 51Demographi cs .................................................................................................. 51Objectiv e 1 ....................................................................................................... 51Objectiv e 2 ....................................................................................................... 52Objectiv e 3 ....................................................................................................... 52Conclusi ons ............................................................................................................ 53Discussions and Implicati ons .................................................................................. 54National Resear ch Agenda ..................................................................................... 57Recommendat ions .................................................................................................. 57Recommendations fo r Practi ce ........................................................................ 57Recommendations for Fu ture Res earch ........................................................... 58Summary ................................................................................................................ 59 APPENDIX A UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD IRB 02 APPROVA L ............................................................................................................ 60B OBTAINING PERMISSION TO USE MSI FROM DR. J. BARBUTO ...................... 62C INSTRUCTIONS FOR AMINISTERI NG AMBASSADOR ADVISORS .................... 63D MSI QUESTIONNAIRE ADMINISTERED TO STUDENT AMBASSADORS .......... 64E UF IRB CONSENT FORM SIGN ED BY EACH PAR TICIPANT .............................. 68LIST OF RE FERENCES ............................................................................................... 69BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ............................................................................................ 75 7

PAGE 8

LIST OF TABLES Table page 4-1 Frequencies and percentages of participant s gender. ........................................ 384-2 Frequencies and percentages of partici pants age .............................................. 394-3 Frequencies and percentages of par ticipants race/e thnicity ............................... 394-4 Frequencies and percentages of participants cla ss ranking ............................... 404-5 Frequencies and percentages of parti cipants leadership experience ................. 404-6 Frequencies and percentages of participant s prior leadership experiences ....... 414-7 Frequencies and percentages of parti cipants leadership education ................... 414-8 Frequencies and percentages of participants leadership courses ...................... 424-9 Frequencies and percentages of female MSI hi ghest score s ............................. 424-10 Frequencies and percentages of male MSI highes t scores ................................ 434-11 Ambassador sources of motivation scores ......................................................... 444-12 Highest ranked MSI questi ons ............................................................................ 454-13 One-way analysis of variance between gender and sources of motivation ........ 454-14 White and Non-white source s of motivati on score s ............................................ 464-15 Non-White sources of motivation scores ............................................................ 474-16 One-way analysis of variance between race/ethnicity an d motivation ................ 474-17 Students with prior leadership experience and students without experience sources of moti vation scores .............................................................................. 484-18 One-way analysis of variance between leadership experience and motivation .. 484-19 Students with and with out leadership education MSI sco res .............................. 494-20 One-way analysis of variance between leadership education and motivation .... 49 8

PAGE 9

LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 21 Conceptual model for collegiate l eadership ........................................................ 304-1 Male and female sour ces of soti vation ............................................................... 43 9

PAGE 10

10 Abstract of Thesis Pres ented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulf illment of the Requirements for t he Degree of Master of Science FACTORS INFLUENCING LEADERSHIP IN COLLEGIATE AGRICULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS: TH E ROLE OF GENDER By Andrea Lauren Andrews May 2011 Chair: Nicole Stedman Major: Agricultural Educ ation and Communication This study examined the sources of moti vation among collegiate leaders, focusing on gender differences. Furthermore, the study sought to understand what the sources of motivation among collegiate leaders were, t he differences between male and female collegiate leaders, and the strength of motivation and relationships between race/ethnicity, leadership experience, and leadership courses taken by the student leader. Theoretical framework included Leonar d, Beauvais, and Scholls Self ConceptBased Work Motivation model (1999). The research design was descriptive survey and the population included AAAEs Southern Region College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Land-Grant University Ambassador Teams ( n =177). The study found that male collegiate leaders were motivated Instrumentally, indicating that gender can impact whether or not the student is Instrumentally motivated. The majority of ambassador teams were White/non-Hispanic females that were primarily identified with an intrinsic source of motivation. The study also uncovered that over half of the ambassadors actively ta ke part in their College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Leadership courses.

PAGE 11

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Agricultural science has long been know n as being male-dominated (Buttel & Goldberger, 2002). However, females are increasingly taking on more leadership roles in FFA (Ricketts, Osborne, & Rudd, 2004), executive roles in Americas industries (Eagly & Carli, 2003), and the agriculture indu stry (Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, 1995). When I look at the issues we face and when I think of the changes we need, I am convinced as I have ever been that our future depends on the leadership of womennot to replace men, but to transform our options alongside them (Wilson, 2004, p. 5). Women on the rise as leaders in Americas society have overcome barriers and faced challenges (Rule & Ambady, 2009). Mo re and more women are driven to be leaders in their workplace, community and gov ernment (Eagly & Car li, 2003). According to the 1982 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statis tics, in 1972 women held only 18% of managerial and administrative positions. By 2002 females were occupying over 46% of those same leadership positions. Organizational cultures take advantage of hiring and retaining females and minorities as leaders (Eagly & Carli, 2003). Females do not climb the corporate ladder like many males, rather their path is more of a labyrinth (Eagly & Carli, 2003). The trend of increasing female leadersh ip has also impacted colleges of agricultural and life sciences across America (National Science Foundation [NSF] 2006a, 2006b). Buttel and Goldber ger believed that, Because of womens distinctive situatedness in knowledge pr oduction processes, women can be expected to hold different views than men regarding resear ch, sciences and technology: generally more critical, more questioning, and more public regarding and theref ore have different 11

PAGE 12

attitudes towards agriculture research and industry (Buttel & Goldberger, 2002). Although female faculty has increased at ma ny colleges of agricultural and life sciences since the 1960s (National Science Foundat ion [NSF] 2006a, 2006b), there has been little attention to what these women are doing or feeling while serving in these positions (Crowe & Goldberger, 2009). This implies that female motivation to serve in leadership positions has had little attention as well. History of Female Leadership This is not the first time America has seen trends of female leadership. In the 1940s during World War II, women took on the responsibility of running Americas industry while many men were away servi ng at war. Although women returned back to work as housewives once the war was over, for many of them it planted a seed of interest in Americas workforce. Women had proven to themselves and their country that they could do the job and there were la sting effects (Women in the work force during WWII, 2010). Again in the 1960s America saw a different side of women during the civil rights movement. Delinder stated, E ven though the civil rights move ment did not intentionally address gender inequality, t he dynamics of conflict and social change were influenced as much by gender as they were by race (Delinder, 2009, p. 986). During this time women protested sexist acts and fought for educational and employment equality (Teasley, Retrieved May 8, 2010). Although wom en were often invisible as grass roots activists and not seen as leaders during th is time, many female s were taking on leadership roles (Delinder, 2009). The 1955 Montgomery Bus Boycott is an exampl e that is known for taking a stand for racial inequality, but also presented an opportunity for gender equality. Rosa Parks 12

PAGE 13

powerful demand for equality did not only br ing attention to and support for racial equality, but also supported the Womens Political Council (Delinder, 2009). This is only one of many events that contributed to wom en eventually gaining full citizenship and the ability to vote, work, and support them selves (Delinder, 2009).The heading above shows that if you have a subheading of a cert ain level, you must have more than one. The rationale is that you c annot have a list of only one item. Female Leadership in Colleges of Agricultural and Life Sciences Through the years women have been educati ng themselves and daring to balance the responsibilities of work and children. The recent phenomenon of females emerging as collegiate leaders is more astounding now than it was over 50 years ago. Females play an integral part in the American Association for Agricu ltural Educations Southern Region College of Agricultural and Life Sciences ambassador teams at Auburn University, University of Arkansas, Universi ty of Florida, University of Georgia, University of Kentucky, Louisiana State Univ ersity, Mississippi State University, North Carolina State University, Clemson University University of Tennessee, and Virginia Tech. The responsibility of College of Agricultural and Life Sciences ambassadors is to engage in student leadership and academic success, support their states food production and natural resources, and to in teract with diverse populations through public speaking and networking while sharing career and academic opportunities with students (Ambassadors, 2009). The strong presence of female leaders withi n these Colleges of Agricultural and Life Sciences pose many questions. Are prof essionals in the field of agricultural and life sciences seeking out females to promote di versity within their college? Are females the most qualified candidates applying for amba ssador positions? The question this study 13

PAGE 14

will address is if females are motivated differently than males to succeed their counterparts in retaining leadership roles within their college and university? Research shows that the challenge to lead can mo tivate nontraditional students (D'Haem & Krueger, 1993). Could in fact t he reason be why females are seeking out and retaining leadership positions is because they are so mehow motivated differently than males? Research Problem Research has shown that men and women lead different ways (Lauterbach & Weiner, 1996), and the trends of female leader ship have gained recent attention. In seeking to find factors contributing to the recent phenomena of female leadership within College of Agricultural and Life Sciences ambassador teams the research problem leading this study was, what is motiva ting collegiate leaders to seek and retain leadership positions and how do those sources differ between males and females? The study also sought to uncover reasons why women hold leadership positions in an ever changing, and evolving society and to provide professional s and educators with research to better understand gender role differences in the area of collegiate motivation and leadership. Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this study was to compare the sources of motivation among female and male collegiate leaders. The following research objectives were used to guide the study: To determine the sources of motivation among female and male collegiate leaders. To differentiate between sources of motivation in male and female collegiate leaders. 14

PAGE 15

To examine the strength of relationships between sources of motivation and race/ethnicity, leadership experience, and leadership courses taken by the student or currently being taken. Significance of Study Managers looking for executive leaders who hav e what it takes are discovering the secret is to hire a female (Sharpe, 2000) Could this be because of womans unique motivation? This study is significant to collegiate leadership and our society today because societys definition of leadership is changing (Hammer & Champy, 1994) from a traditional hierarchical approach to a mo re team oriented approach. Kim Phipps, President of Messiah College, believes it is essential for females to hold highly recognized leadership roles because they ar e able to bring new perspectives to the decision making process (Fishlock, 2010). Discovering the sources of motivation that are driving females to take a more active role in college leadership will benefit the field of leadership studies and student development. Colleges of Agricultural and Life Sciences will be better able to customize leadership courses to help further understand those source s of motivation. Students who understand how they are motivated can positively build upon those sources of motivation, foster it in other students or employees around them, and become a more transformational leader themselves. Learning the underlying sources of motivation may also help explain why filling a leadership role with a female is so appealing to professionals in academia and Americas workforce. This study has contributed to the progr ess of The National Research Agenda: Agricultural Education and Communication (O bsorne, 2007) by focusing on Agricultural Leadership and its relation to gender and mo tivation within collegiate student 15

PAGE 16

organizations and help better develop program of studies for students seeking to develop leadership skills. The study has supported leadership opportunities for underrepresented populations. The study will also bring attention to the Agricultural Education in University and Postsecondary Settings research priority area through striving to enhance students understanding of t heir own sources of motivation and how it may or may not relate to their gender and leadership experiences. The specific Research Priority Areas (RPA) this study will address are: Agricultural Leadership RPA 1: Develop and disseminate effective leadership education programs. RPA 2: Support leadership opportuniti es for underrepresented populations. Agricultural Education in University and Postsecondary Settings RPA 2: Improve the success of students enr olled in agricultural and life sciences academic and technical programs. Definitions of terms College of Agricultural and Life Sciences AmbassadorsBased on each universitys unique needs and characteristics, the ambassadors are a selected group of students who display student leadership and academic success. They strive to share information about the universitys College of Agricultural and Life Sciences academic and career opportuniti es. These students are selected through an interview and presentation process and are therefore comfortable speaking in public and interacting with diverse populat ions and support their states food, production and natural resour ces (Ambassadors, 2009). LeadershipThe influencing process of leaders and followers to achieve organizational objectives through change (Lussier & Achua, 2010, p. 6). Leadership has diverse and broad terms, for the purpose of this study leadership was defined as serving the role of a Co llege of Agricultural and Life Sciences ambassador. Leadership experience was determined by the number of high school and college positions held as the organizations Chai r, Chair-Elect, Presi dent, Vice President, President-Elect Captain or Co-Captain by participants at the loca l, regional, state or national level. Leadership education was determined by the number of 16

PAGE 17

leadership courses complet ed or currently being taken by the student. Leadership courses included: Interpersonal Leader ship, Leadership Development Theory, Communication and Leadership, Global Lea dership, Leading Change or Change Leadership, Learning Organizations, and Ethics. Motivation- Anything that affects behavior in pur suing a certain outcome (Lussier & Achua, 2010, p. 84). This study utilized Barbuto & Scholls (1998) 5 sources of motivation: intrinsic process, instrum ental, self-concept external, self-concept internal and goal internalization. Intrinsic process motivation will identify students that enjoy their work, and view it as an incentive and fun. Instrumental motivated students will seek tangible rewards, such as pay or promotions Students with self-concept external motivation may seek social acceptance or status, and have a strong need for affiliation. Self-concept internal motiva tion will identify student s that have strong internal standards and behave in a way to back those believes and values up. Finally, goal internalization motivation will relate to students with a sense of responsibility and are very goal driven. GenderFor the purpose of this study we will define gender as male or female. Participants selected which gender role they identified with. Limitations of the Study A convenience sample of the 11 southeaste rn Colleges of Agricultural and Life Sciences and therefore no generalizations were made beyond the studys selected population of collegiate leaders. Student ambassadors may have had experience participating in leadership and personality a ssessments which presented a threat that their experience in leadership positions and extracurricular activities may lead them to give the socially desired answer. This creates a question whether or not the ambassadors completed the assessment trut hfully. This limitation was addressed by administering an informed consent form that ensured participants that their answers are kept confidential. 17

PAGE 18

18 Basic assumptions The researcher assumed that ambassadors most likely had some leadership development opportunities prior to participat ing in the study. Although many of the participants may have been famili ar with personality or l eadership assessments, the researcher assumed that this would not have a negative impact on the results. This study also assumed that students answere d the assessment honestly and that the ambassadors would have been willing to participate. Chapter Summary Female leadership trends have always had a positive and lasting impact on American society. From t he 1940s when women answered t he call of duty during World War II and became active in the work force and into the 1960s when they demanded equality and fought for full citizenship, female leadership has had many milestones throughout history. With females becoming more involved in southeastern Colleges of Agriculture and Life Sciences ambassador teams this study discovered the sources that are motivating them to serve in these leadership roles. This study looked at females in between high school and the workforce and focused on t he motivation sources among college-aged females holding leadership positions in t heir colleges. This study hoped to further develop the knowledge base of student motiva tion as it relates to leadership and to confront the mystery of recent trends in female collegiate leadership.

PAGE 19

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The purpose of this study was to determi ne the sources of motivation experienced by collegiate female leaders and how those sources of motivation compared to their male counterparts. Objectives that led this study included: 1) to determine the sources of motivation among female and male collegiat e leaders, 2) to differentiate between sources of motivation in male and female collegiate leaders, and 3) to examine the relationship between sources of motivation and race/ethnicity, leadership experience, and leadership courses taken by the student or currently being taken by the student. Leonard, Beauvais, and Scholls (1999) Self Concept-Based Theory was utilized as the theoretical framework for this study The Self Concept-Based Model describes five sources of motivation: intrinsic process, instrumental, self-concept external, selfconcept internal and goal internalization. These five sources of motivation provide the basis for Barbuto and Scholls (1998) Motivati on Sources Inventory in strument. In order to establish a thorough description of mo tivation, the following theories are also described in this study: Maslows Theory of Human Motivation, Herzbergs Theory, and McCellands Theory of Motivation as a bas is for using the Self Concept-Based framework. In addition to discussing the theoretical fr amework, the concept ual framework will present studies in the areas of leadership, g ender differences, females in the agriculture industry, universities, and College of Agricu ltural and Life Sciences ambassador teams. A conceptual model will illust rate potential relationships between gender, leadership experience, and motivation among young collegiate leaders who are serving as ambassadors within their Colleges of Agricultural and Life Sciences. 19

PAGE 20

Motivation Theory Maslows (1943) Theory of Human Motiva tion claims that physiological needs are the first reason for motivation, and that if none of an organisms needs are met then the physiological needs will be the most dominant. Th is initial need then causes a hierarchy of needs, and once each need is met individuals are no longer motivated to take action and seek resources to satisfy this hunger (Maslow, 1943). The Theory of Human Motivation presents five areas of basic needs in the hierarchical order of: physiological, safety, love, esteem, and self -actualization (Maslow, 1943). Herzbergs (1959) Theory of Motivation and Hygiene Factors consists of two components that help identify fact ors that impact individual a ttitudes towards their work. The two components of this theory are sati sfiers and dissatisfiers. The satisfiers consists of five factors t hat enhance the individuals experience at work. Those factors are: achievement, recogniti on, the work itself, res ponsibility, and advancement (Herzberg, Mausner, & Sny derman, 1959). The dissatisfyi ng factors are: company policy, supervision, interpersonal relations, working conditions, and salary (Herzberg, Mausner, & Snyderman, 1959). The satisfyi ng factors produce long-term impacts and are identified as motives, while the dissa tisfacting factors only produce a short-term impact and are identified as hygiene factors (Herzberg, Mausner, & Snyderman, 1959). McClellands (1987) Motivation Theory identifies four human needs that lead people to be motivated. These four sources of motivation included: achievement, power, affiliation, and avoidance. Individuals wit h the need for achievement may be looking for incentives such as, to please the teacher, to avoid criticism, to gain the approval of a loved one, or simply to get some time off from work. W hat should be involved in the 20

PAGE 21

achievement motive is doing something be tter for its own safe, for the intrinsic satisfaction of doing something bette r (McClelland, 1987, p. 228). The power motive can originate from losing a job or position of status, parents being too passive when it comes to sex or aggression, or even holding leadership positions (McClelland, 1987). The need for a ffiliation or need to be with people is the concern over establishing, maintaining, or restoring a positive, affective relationship with another person or persons ( (McClelland, 1987, p. 347). Individuals who avoid taking risks and avoid looking for opportuniti es that will guarantee themselves success are considered to have an avoidance moti ve, which is often caused by anxiety (McClelland, 1987), and are motivated by fear of failure, fear of success, and fear of rejection. Although McClellands theory includes four moti ves, the need for avoidance is not widely accepted (McClelland, 1987). Theoretical Framework Although prior theories have led to a better understanding of motivation, the primary foundation for this study was Leonard, Beauvais, and Scholls (1999) Self Concept-Based Work Motivation model. This m odel integrates many prior theories of motivation and their perspectives of the proc ess of motivation and is most appropriate for researching sources of motivation when incl uding the factor of se lf-concept, as this study did (Leonard, Beauv ais, & Scholl, 1999). The purpose of developing the Self Concept -Based Work Motivation model was to adapt prior motivational theories and to cr eate a unifying framework for motivation (Leonard, Beauvais, & Scholl, 1999). Traditi onal models of motivation may not offer explanations for more diverse behaviors in organizati onal settings (Leonard, Beauvais, & Scholl, 1999). This theory of self-concept st rived to fill a gap in motivational theory 21

PAGE 22

research, because previously there was not a recognized theory that strongly supported the findings of motivational factors through research (Locke & Henne, 1986). Leonard, Beauvais, & Scholl (1999) proposed five propositions to better explain motivation and predict behavior. Proposition one proposes the five basic sources of motivation: intrinsic process, extrinsic/in strumental rewards, external self-concept, internal self-concept, and goal internaliz ation. Proposition two proposes that an individual can be characterized by their motivational profile which is built by their strongest motivational sources. Proposition th ree proposes that an individuals most dominant source of motivation will play a role in decision making and behavior. Proposition four proposes that the dominant source will win if ever two or more motivational sources conflict. Proposition five proposes that in different environments and situations individuals wi ll have different motivational profiles (Leonard, Beauvais, & Scholl, 1999, p. 988). Leonard, Beauvais and Scholl proposed that there are five sources of motivation that integrated prior theories of motivation. These five sources of motivation include: intrinsic process, instrumental, self-conc ept external, self-concept internal and goal internalization and are listed as the first proposition made by Leonard, Beauvais, and Scholl. Intrinsic process motivation will identif y students that enjoy their work and view it as an incentive and fun. Instrumentally mo tivated students will seek tangible rewards, such as pay or promotions. Students with self-concept external motivation may seek social acceptance or status and have a strong need for affiliation. Self-concept internal motivation will identify students that have strong internal standards and behave in a way consistent with those believes and values. Finally, goal internalization motivation will 22

PAGE 23

relate to students with a sense of respons ibility and are very goal driven (Leonard, Beauvais, & Scholl, 1999). Conceptual Framework Recent research addressed the idea that th e definition of leadership is evolving and may favor the female gender role sinc e contemporary leadership is modeling the role of an advisor or coach and is less hier archical than traditional leadership (Eagly & Carli, 2003). Modern l eadership may encompass collaborati on, teamwork, the ability to support, engage and empower your followers (Hammer & Champy, 1994). Another new form of leadership is postindustrial leadersh ip, which focuses on relationships and how they develop as well as a shared commitmen t to an ultimate goal or mission (Komives, Lucas, & McMahon, 1998). Although researchers linked leadership to risk-taking which is most commonly found in males, research has shown that the variance between gender and risk-taking has decreased (Byrnes, Miller, & Schafer, 1999). These findings indicate one of the contributing factors to emer ging female leadership may be the increase in risk-taking behavior in females. Eagly and Carli (2003) suggested that when organizations are more genderbalanced they have a larger selection of qua lified and talented lea ders. Appointments of women signal an organizations departure fr om past practices and help it to capture the symbols of innovation and progressive change (Eagly & Carli, 2003, p. 827). Modern organizational practices have also opened a door for female leadership and presented a more level playing field (Klein, 2000). 23

PAGE 24

Gender Differences in Leadership The relationship between a child and its prim ary caregiver is an important factor in that childs gender development (Chodorow, 1978). Since this relationship is most often that the primary caregiver is the childs mother, and since women see their daughters as part of themselves differing in how they see their sons girls emerge [from childhood] with a stronger basis for experiencing anothe rs needs or feelings as their own (Chodorow, 1987, p. 187). Therefore, females develop a more emotional connectedness and males are more emoti onally separated (Chodorow, 1987). The difference in how males and females connect em otionally with others could play a role in building professional relationship wit h superiors (Lauterbach & Weiner, 1996). Gender roles in leadership develop wit h females having a more communityoriented perspective and males having a more task-oriented perspective (Eagly & Carli, 2003). When researching possible gender differences among the five sources of motivation, Barbuto and Fritz (2003) discover ed that males scored significantly higher in instrumental motivation. Although no additional differences were found, Barbuto and Fritz stated that no prior studies had ex amined gender using the Motivation Sources Inventory. To approach the area of gender differences in motivation with an international perspective, Rusillo & Arias (2004) conduct ed a study to examine gender differences and several motivational factors. The study c onsisted of 521 ninth and tenth graders in the providence of Jaen, Spain. The study discovered that gender differences did exist and that females displayed a lower level of extrinsic motivation and took on more responsibility for their failure than males. 24

PAGE 25

Lauterbach and Weiner (1996) explored the ways in which female and male managers build relationships with their s uperiors through upward influence. The study consisted of 10 males and 11 female mi ddle managers within Fortune 100 companies. Participants were administered a survey and semi-structured interview. The study asked several questions related to gender differences. The following hypotheses were found to be supported: Female managers are more likely than male managers to consider t he viewpoints and feelings of others prior to initiating action, female managers are more likely to be concerned about interpersonal risk while male managers are mo re likely to be concerned about personal risk, female managers are more likely than ma le managers to involve others in planning their influence strategy, and when implementi ng their upward influence strategy, female managers are more likely to be both task-focused and interpersonally focused whereas male managers are more likely to be solely task-focused (Lauterbach & Weiner, 1996, pp. 89-92). Results of this study concluded females were more likely than males to consider others points of view before taking action, to have concern for interpersonal risk rather than personal risk, and to involve others in planning rather than alone. Females were found to be more interpersonally focused rather than task-focused when attempting upward influence and to judge the success of thei r task with not only its completion but the satisfaction of their super ior (Lauterbach & Weiner, 1996). A meta-analysis of 45 studies conducted by Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt, & Engen (2003) concluded that females displayed different transformational behaviors than males. According to Bass (1985, 1998), becom ing a role model and having others trust 25

PAGE 26

and follow you as a leader is part of being a transformational leader. Eagly and Johnson (1990) conducted an earlier meta-analysis that discovered research claiming that female leaders lead more democratically and have a more participative style of leadership rather than a more directive style when compared to male leaders. Females in the Agriculture Industry Greater penalties against women t han men for dominant and assertive behaviors reflect the constraints on women to avoid stereotypically masculine behavior (Eagly & Carli, 2003, p. 821). With the number of fema les in the agricultural industry increasing (Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, 1995) in what has long been known as a maledominated industry (Bttel & Goldberger, 2002) Research has shown that female leaders have most likely overcome many barriers and challenges to be where they are. It is important to consider the challenges females face in the corporate world. Evidence has also revealed that males have a higher chance of promotion when working in a male-dominated j ob, but the chances of a wo man leaving her job increase in this environment (Maume, 1999). Male evaluat ors typically rate female leaders lower than equivalent male leaders, and female eval uators display no bias (Eagly, Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992). Rohs and Anderson (2001) studied motivation in agricultural education students. This study consisted of seventh and eighth graders and compared many demographics among students in Georgia. The study disco vered that female students had a higher need for affiliation and need for power than males. While seeking to discover the underlyi ng factors that contribute to the phenomenon of female leaders emerging in Florida FFA, Ricketts, Osborne and Rudd (2003) suggested seven component s that contribute to a student s level of leadership 26

PAGE 27

and involvement. These compone nts included: family, FFA, school, self, agriculture program FFA Chapters, comm unity, and the students agrisci ence teacher. The study included both qualitative research through focus-groups and an open-ended questionnaire along with quantitative research through a student questionnaire. Female students enrolled in rural Florida FFA programs were selected to participate in the study based on their leadership experience and advi sor recommendation. Parents were also involved by completing a questionnaire s ent home with the fema le students. The study showed that females were promi nently leading in t he rural Florida FFA Chapters and that females were more willing to work, more motivat ed, more mature and more likely to step outside of their comfort zone than male students. The researchers also suggested further research to become more aware of the underlying factors that influence imbalanced gender leadership in lo cal FFA chapters (Ricketts, Osborne, & Rudd, 2004, p. 51). This study has sought to do so. A 2008 Girl Scouts of Americ a study found that young fema les from 8-17 years of age tended to reject formal l eadership roles. These young ladies seemed to already consider themselves leaders because of their ability to make a difference in the world around them and bring about social change (Girl Scout Resear ch Institutde, 2008). The trend of female leadership is spread from young developing females, into high school, college, and throughout the workplace. While studying gender inequality within the agricultural sciences at land-grant universities, Buttel & Goldberger (2002) di scovered that there is a disproportionate influx of young females entering agricultural sciences at land-grant universities. We can assume that many of these fe male students were also playin g leadership roles in their 27

PAGE 28

local FFA chapters and intend on working within the agricultural industry. By uncovering sources of motivation driving these y oung females to become and stay active, employers within the agricultural industr y could learn new ways to attract both outstanding male and female employees. College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Leadership Over the years leaders have emerged within the agriculture industry, and cannot afford to leave out leadership within our colleges (Barrett, 1983). Leadership educators are constantly searching for natural l eadership laboratories where students can rehearse their instinctive leadership tenden cies and test the leadership processes learned in class (Fritz, Townsend, Hoover, Weeks, Carter, & Nietfeldt, 2003, p. 18). Hoover and Dunigan (2004) discovered that 72% of participants actively involved in college of agricultural and life sciences collegiate student organizations joined the organization to further seek leadership development opportunities. This study also suggest that offering leadership developm ent opportunities is important to the recruitment and retention of future students into a College of Agricultural Sciences, garnering support of alumni, and preparing futu re leaders in the food, agricultural and natural resource sciences (Hoov er & Dunigan, 2004, p. 25). Fritz, et. al (2003) conducted an analysis of leadership courses being offered in Colleges of Agricultural Education. That research proved that, leadership skills are important to the long-term success of co llege graduates, (Agnew & Kennedy, 2005, p. 41), this study also discovered that sixtyeight percent of respondents were offering leadership courses and that undergraduates and graduates were both actively involved in taking the offered courses. There was al so evidence discovered in this study that students from outside the college were attending leadership course s offered through the 28

PAGE 29

agriculture education department, indicati ng that there is a strong demand for leadership development opportuniti es within Colleges of Agricultural and Life Sciences. Collegiate Ambassador Teams Lerner (1989) conducted a study that c oncluded that females enhance others experiences while males tend to focus at their own experiences. Ambassadors are collegiate leaders that serv e as a team while repres enting their colleges and the agricultural industry. The overall purpose of a College of Agricultural and Life Sciences ambassador is to promote the college and unive rsity (Woelk & Weeks, 2010, p. 19). Shertzer and Schuh (2004) found postindustrial leadership characteristics on college campuses. Postindustria l leadership has been defined as sharing responsibility, having the change to create change, and being inclusive (Rost, 1993). These characteristics of postindustrial leadership help college organizations attract and engage non-traditional st udents, such as women (Kez ar, 2000; Romano, 1996). Recent research suggested utilizing a team env ironment and compared management styles within agricultural department s (Edgar, 2005). The study pr esented reasons to leave behind the traditional hierarchical management style of directing employees (Edgar, 2005). Edgar explained the strength and advant age of working in a team environment keeps all members focused on the missi on, and encourages them to be more collaborative in working in accomp lishing that mission (Edgar, 2005). Conceptual Model As shown in the literature, leadersh ip experience, gender, and motivation are important components of collegiate leadership The following conceptual model (Figure 2-1) displays these relationships. This study examined factors that may contribute to collegiate leaders motivation, specific ally focusing on gender differences. 29

PAGE 30

Figure 2-1. Conceptual model for collegiate leadership. Figure 2-1 is an equation for collegiate leadership and includes the following factors: Collegiate leadership Any position of leadership held by students within a university or college organization. Self-concept Adapted from Ricketts, Osbor ne, & Rudd (2003), self-concept is the component of Self from the Conceptual Mo del of Factors Affecting the Emergence of Leaders in Local FFA Chapters. Self-concept was made up of the following factors: Gender For the purpose of this study gender was defined as female or male and was self-reported. Motivation Includes Leonard, Beauvais, & Scholls scale of Sources of Motivation that identify five sources of motivation: in trinsic process, instrumental, self-concept external, self-concept internal and goal internalization. Experience Components adopted from Ricketts, Osborne, & Rudd (2003) include: success/failure, positions held, career plans, athletic and academic participation. For the purpos e of this study, positions held was adapted to 30

PAGE 31

leadership positions held and academic participation was adapted to leadership academic. External factors Identified family and school as factors that are not able to be controlled. Included in family were factors of age and race/ethnicity and included in the component of school was class cla ssification, opportunities, and faculty support. Chapter Summary The presented theories of motivation unc over how male and female collegiate leaders may be motivated differently and build a foundation for this study. Research has shown that females and males lead di fferently (Lauterbach & Weiner, 1996), and therefore there is reason to believe they are also motivated differently. This study sought to address those differences in a co llegiate setting through conducting research in Colleges of Agriculture and Life Sciences and by comparing findings of motivational sources with gender and common demographi cs. The theory of self-concept encompassed the 5 sources of motivation that would be utilized in the study. Also, there was little research found within Colleges of Ag ricultural and Life Sciences relating to gender and motivation withi n its student leaders. CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODS This chapter focuses on the methodology us ed to address the research problem of the recent acceleration of female leadership in Colleges of Agricultural and Life Sciences. This chapter will explain this study s research design, procedures, population for this study, the instrument utilized, and how data were collected and analyzed. The purpose of this study was to discover if female collegiate leaders are motivated differently than male collegiate leaders to bec ome involved in leadership positions within 31

PAGE 32

their Colleges of Agricultural and Life Sciences at universities throughout the southeastern United States. Research Design Data has been presented in a quantitative method and the research design was descriptive survey, which utilized the Motiva tion Sources Inventory (Barbuto & Scholl, 1998). By using a descriptive design, conclusions were able to present a summary of an existing phenomena by using numbers to characterize individuals or groups (McMillan & Schumac her, 2010, p. 22). Possible errors with a descriptive surv ey include measurement error, sampling error, and non-response error. Measurem ent error was addressed by utilizing an instrument that had proven relia bility and validity in past studies, the relatively high validity and reliability of the measure indicate that the subscales capture the five sources of motivation (Barbuto & Scholl, 19 98, p. 1017), however; this study selected a population that had not ut ilized the instrument in prior re search and a post-hoc reliability test was conducted. Each source of motivation produced a Cronbach Alpha score higher than .6, (Intrinsic Proc ess=.65, Instrumental=.77, Se lf-concept External=.83, Selfconcept Internal=.64, Goal Internal=.82). Although a convenient sample was taken for this study, sampling error was address ed through ensuring that each College of Agricultural and Life Sciences ambass ador team participated in the study. Nonresponse error was accounted for by directly contacting each of the ambassador team advisors via email to encourage and ensure parti cipation while estab lishing professional relationships with the advisors. 32

PAGE 33

Population A convenient sample was taken of the S outhern Region American Association for Agricultural Education (AAAE, 2010), 1862 Land-Grant uni versities Colleges of Agricultural and Life Sciences (CALS) collegiate ambassador teams. Universities included: Auburn University, University of Arkansas, University of Florida, University of Georgia, University of Kentucky, Louisiana State Univ ersity, Mississippi State University, North Carolina State Universi ty, Clemson University, University of Tennessee, and Virginia Tech. AAAE lists 15 uni versities within their southern region, however; only 11 were included in this study because Oklahoma and Texas have the option to participate in the Western Region and for minimal expense reasons Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands were not included. Each of the 11 universities participated and an overall response rate of 65.10% ( n =177) was obtained. Collegiate ambassadors are elected by an application and interview process and are responsible for representing their College of Agricultural and Life Sciences by sharing student opportunities, traveling lo cally and representing their colleges, and traveling nationally to promote what their colle ge is doing in the field of agricultural and life sciences. The size of ambassador team s ranged from eight to 48 team members. Data Collection The initial step in data collection was securi ng the University of Florida Institutional Review Board IRB 02 approval for non-medical projects (Appendix A). The individual responsible for creating the Motivation Source s Inventory, Dr. Barbuto, was contacted via email and permission was gained to use t he Motivation Sources Inventory (MSI) in this study as the primary instrument (Appendix B). 33

PAGE 34

The College of Agricultural and Life Sc iences ambassador team advisors were contacted via email during the month of July 2010 to introduce the study and make arrangements to receive the MSI in the mail and administer the questionnaire to participating student ambassadors at the next regularly scheduled ambassador team meeting in the 2010 fall semester. The c ontact information for ambassador team advisors was collected through the University of Floridas College of Agricultural and Life Sciences ambassador advisor, Mrs. Charlotte Emerson and college ambassador websites. Packets were prepared that included instru ctions (Appendix C) for the advisors who would be administering the assessment s, the questionnaires (Appendix D) and prepaid retuning envelopes for completed questi onnaires. A packet was mailed to the 11 ambassador team advisors on September 1, 2010, along with an email update to each advisor (Appendix E). The ambassador team advis or served as the administrator of the questionnaire at a regularly scheduled meeting at each of their own participating universities. When administering the questionnaire the adm inistrator introduced himself/herself as the administrator and distributed the IR B informed consent forms (Appendix F). The administer then collected the IRB inform ed consent forms and distributed the MSI questionnaire to participants that agreed to participate, and made it known to participants that they were able to addr ess the administrator with any questions concerning the MSI questi onnaire and then collected the completed questionnaires. Ambassador team advisors returned the completed questionnaires in pre-paid mailing envelopes provided by the researcher. Between the months of September and 34

PAGE 35

November 2010 results were received from par ticipating ambassador teams. During this time MSI scores were calculated by the researcher. Instrumentation The Motivation Sources Inventory (MSI) seeks to identify dominant sources of motivation in individuals. The Motivation S ources Inventory includes Leonard, Beauvais, and Scholls (1999) five sources of motivation: Intrinsic Process, Instrumental, External Self-concept, Internal Self-conc ept, and Goal Internalization. This instrument proposed an integrative model of motivation built on pas t research efforts (Leonard, Beauvais, & Scholl, 1999, p. 1011), which no other instrument had sought to do. Barbuto & Scholls (1998) MSI was utilized to determine source s of motivation for student ambassadors participating in the study. The MSI consist ed of 30 questions, six questions for each of the five sources of motivation. The questionnaire (Appendix D) inclu ded the 30 MSI questions along with 6 questions asking the students gender, age, race /ethnicity, class classification, prior leadership experience, and prio r of currently being taken l eadership education. Gender was categorized as male or female, age wa s a numerically entered by participants, class rank was identified as freshman, sophom ore, junior, or senior, and race/ethnicity options were listed for participants to select the most relevant. Races and ethnicities were the same19 races and ethnicities listed on the U.S. Census (2010), and included: White, African American, Sa moan, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, other Asian, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Native Hawaiian, Guamanian or Chamorro, Other Pacifi c Islander, Cuban, Mexican/Mexican American/Chicano, Puerto Ric an, another Hispanic/Latino/ Spanish origin, and some other race/ethnicity. 35

PAGE 36

Participants were asked whether prior l eadership experience wa s held during their high school or college careers at either a local, regional, stat e, or national level. Prior leadership education taken or currently bei ng taken included Interpersonal Leadership, Leadership Development Theory, Communica tion and Leadership, Global Leadership, Leading Change or Change Leadership, Learning Organizations Ethics, or other. Data Analysis The completed 177 questionnaires were entered into SPSS to identify any statistical significance. ANOVA analyse s were conducted so the five dependent variables of motivation were compared to the independent va riable of gender. Descriptive statistics were ran with the variables of: gender, ethnicity, age, classification, leadership experience, and leadership educ ation. Means and frequencies were also calculated. Chapter Summary By evaluating student ambassadors at the 11 southeastern Colleges of Agricultural and Life Sciences, this study was able to better understand the acceleration of female leadership. This was a quantitativ e study with a descriptive survey design. The instrument selected for the study, Bar buto and Scholls (1998) Motivation Sources Inventory, had established validi ty and reliability prior to conducting research. In addition to prior reliability tests, Cronbachs Alpha reli ability tests were completed for each of the five sources of motivation which proved a st able instrument. The researcher received the appropriate prior approval from the University of Floridas Institutional Review Board and the creator of the instru ment, Dr. Barbuto. All par ticipating ambassador teams completed questionnaires in a timely matte r and each of the 11 southeastern Colleges of Agricultural and Life Sciences were represented in the data collection. 36

PAGE 37

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS Chapter one described the recent trend of female leadership. The initial chapter also gave an overview of the history of fe male leadership in America and the agricultural industry. The research problem of what is motivating collegiate leaders to seek and retain leadership positions and how do those sources differ between males and females, along with following objectives of this study were also presented in the chapter: 1) determine the sources of motivation between female and male co llegiate leaders, 2) differentiate between sources of motivation in male and female collegiate leaders, and 3) examine the strength of sources of motivation and relationships between race/ethnicity, leadership experience, and leadership courses taken by the students or currently being taken. Chapter one also descr ibed the significance of the study, basic assumptions, terms of the study, and limitations that we re addressed in the study. Chapter two presented the theoretical foundation of the study which covered Maslows Theory of Human Motivation, He rzbergs Theory of Motivation and Hygiene Factors, and McClellands Motivation Theor y. Also presented was the theoretical framework and perspective of -Leonard, B eauvais, and Scholls Self Concept-Based Work Motivation model. A conceptual fram ework and model were also presented in Chapter two, along with previous studies that looked at gender differences in leadership, the agricultural industry, and Coll ege of Agricultural and Life Sciences ambassador teams. Chapter three explained t he methodology used in the study which included the research design, the studys population, instrumentation, data collection and data analysis. Through the data analyses conducted in Chapter three, this study was able to 37

PAGE 38

identify factors contributing to female and male motivation, and compare those factors to demographics to further help explain t he phenomena of the acceleration of female leadership. Chapter four will present the findings of this study through sharing population demographics, along with findings for each of the studys objectives. The population consisted of the 177 student ambassadors that completed the MSI questionnaire. Demographics Demographics that were taken into consideration among the participating student ambassadors were: gender, age, race/ethnici ty, class classification, leadership experience, leadership courses completed or currently being taken by the student. Gender Of all participants, 68% ( n =120) were female and 32% were male ( n =57). Table 41 displays gender of ambassadors. Table 4-1. Frequencies and per centages of participants gender. P Total Answered Female Male 120 57 68.00% 32.00% 177 99.90% Age The age of the participants consists .56% ( n =1) 18 year olds, 16.95% ( n =30) 19 year olds, 29.94% ( n =53) 20 year olds, 37.85% ( n =67) 21 year olds, 9.04% ( n =16) 22 year olds, 1.69% ( n =3) 23 year olds, 1.69% (n =3) of 24 year olds, and 1.69% ( n =3) of 25 and above year olds. The average age of t he sample was 20 years old. Table 4-2 displays the distribution of age among ambassadors. 38

PAGE 39

Table 4-2. Frequencies and per centages of participants age. P Total Answered 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25+ 1 30 53 67 16 3 3 3 .56% 16.95% 26.94% 37.85% 9.04% 1.69% 1.69% 1.69% 177 99.90% Race/Ethnicity Over 86.44% (n =153) of the participant s reported being of White race/ethnicity, 13.56% (n =24) reported a race/ethnicity other than white. Non-whit e origins included: African American 5.65% ( n =10), Another Hispanic, latino/Spanish origin 2.82% ( n =5), Puerto Rican 1.69% ( n =3), Asian Indian 1.13% ( n =2), Korean .56% ( n =1), Vietnamese .56% (n =1), Chinese .56% (n =1), and other .56% ( n =1). For the purposes of data analysis, race/ethnicity was categorized as White ( n =153) and non-White ( n =24). Table 4-3 displays the distribution of race/ethnicity of ambassadors. Table 4-3. Frequencies and percentages of participants race/ethnicity. P Total Answered White African American Another Hispanic Latino/Spanish Puerto Rican Asian Indian Korean Vietnamese Chinese Some other 153 10 5 3 2 1 1 1 1 86.44% 5.65% 2.82% 1.69% 1.13% .56% .56% .56% .56% 177 99.90% 39

PAGE 40

Class classification The ambassadors were made up of 16.38% ( n =29) sophomore, 39.55% ( n =70) juniors, and 44.07% ( n =78) seniors. Table 4-4 disp lays class distribution among ambassadors. Table 4-4. Frequencies and percentages of participants class ranking. P Total Answered Sophomore Junior Senior 29 70 78 16.38% 39.55% 44.07% 177 99.90% Leadership Experience There were 92.66% ( n =164) of the ambassadors t hat had prior leadership experience during college or high school as an organizations Chair, Chair-Elect, President, Vice President, President-Elect, Captain, or Co-Captain. Leaving 7.34% ( n =13) reporting have not held prior leadership positions. Table 4-5 further illustrates prior leadership experience reported. Table 4-5. Frequencies and percentages of participants leadership experience. P Total Answered Prior leadership experience No prior leadership experience 164 13 92.66% 7.34% 177 99.90% The 177 student participants reported havin g held 631 positions of leadership as identified by the questionnaire. 47.07% (n =297) of the students reported having held these positions during their high school career, and 52.93% ( n =334) of these positions were held during the students college career. To furthe r examine prior leadership experience, responses indicated that 81.93% ( n =517) of positions were held on a local level, 7.45% ( n =47) were held on a regional, 10.94% ( n =69) on the state level, and 2.85% (n =18) of prior leadership positions were held on a national level. Table 4-6 40

PAGE 41

further explains when positions of leader ship were held and at what level of the organization. Table 4-6. Frequencies and percentages of participants prior leadership experiences. P Total Answered Total positions held Held during high school Held during college Held on a local level Held on a regional level Held on a state level Held on a national level 631 297 334 517 47 69 18 100.00% 47.07% 52.93% 81.93% 7.45% 10.94% 2.85% 631 99.90% Leadership Education There were 52.54% ( n =93) of ambassadors that reported having taken or currently taking Interper sonal Leadership (13.56%, n =24), Leadership Development Theory (18.64%, n =33), Communication and Leadership (29.38%, n =52), Global Leadership (3.39%, n =6), Leading Change or C hange Leadership (7.34%, n =13), Learning Organizations (9.04%, n =16), Ethics (8.47%, n =15) or other leadership courses (9.04%, n =16) and 47.46% (n =84) reported having not taken a leadership course offered within their College of Agricu ltural and Life Sciences. Table 4-7 displays prior leadership amon g participants. Table 4-7. Frequencies and percentages of participants leadership education. P Total Answered Prior/current leadership education No prior/current leadership education 93 84 52.54% 47.46% 177 99.90% Responses indicated that ambassadors had taken, or were currently taking 175 leadership courses within their College of Ag ricultural and Life Sciences. Table 4-8 further illustrates the breakdown of which leadership courses were taken more often than others. 41

PAGE 42

Table 4-8. Frequencies and percentages of participants leadership courses. P Total Answered Interpersonal leadership Leadership development theory Communication and leadership Global leadership Leading change/chan ge Leadership Learning organizations Ethics Other leadership courses 24 33 52 6 13 16 15 16 13.56% 18.64% 29.38% 3.39% 7.34% 9.04% 8.47% 9.04% 175 99.90% Objective 1 Objective: To determine the sources of motivation among female and male collegiate leaders. There were 27.86% (n =39, M =26.99, SD=2.35) of females that scored highest in Intrinsic process motivation, 26.43% ( n =37, M =26.28, SD=5.14) scored highest in Self-concept external, 24.29% ( n =34, M =25.98, SD=3.36) scored highest in Goal Internalization, 20.71% ( n =29, M =25.75, SD=5.23) scored highest in Instrumental, and a small .71% ( n =1, M =23.08, SD=3.11) scored highest in Self-concept internal. Because several ambassadors had two or three sources of motivation as their highest score, the number of highest scores for males and females will not match the total number of participants. Table 4-9 di splays frequencies and percentages of female highest scored sources of motivation. Table 4-9. Frequencies and percentages of female MSI highest scores. P Total Answered Intrinsic process Instrumental Self-concept external Self-concept internal Goal internalization 39 29 37 1 34 27.86% 20.71% 26.43% .71% 24.29% 140 99.90% 42

PAGE 43

There were 36.76% (n =25, M =27.56, SD=4.83) of males that scored highest in Instrumental motivation, 32.35% ( n =22, M =26.30, SD=6.21) scored highest in Selfconcept external, 16.18% ( n =11, M =26.29, SD=3.05) scored highest in Intrinsic Process, 14.71% (n =10, M =25.63, SD=3.38) scored highest in Goal internalization, and no males highest score was of Self-concept internal motivation. Both males and females second highest ranked source of motivation was Self-concept external and both scored lowest in Self-concept internal motiva tion. Table 4-10 displays frequencies and percentages of male highest scored sources of motivation. Table 4-10. Frequencies and percentages of male MSI highest scores. P Total Answered Intrinsic process Instrumental Self-concept external Self-concept internal Goal internalization 11 25 22 0 10 16.18% 36.76% 32.35% .00% 14.71% 68 99.90% Figure 4-1. Male and female sources of motivation. 43

PAGE 44

The highest ranking source of motiva tion among all ambassadors was Intrinsic Process ( M =26.77, SD=.20), followed by Instrumental ( M =26.33, SD=.39), Self-concept External ( M =26.28, SD=.41), Goal Internalization ( M =25.86, SD=.25), and the lowest ranked source of motivation among amba ssadors was Self-concept Internal ( M =22.78, SD=.24). Table 4-11 displays College of Agricu ltural and Life Sciences ambassador sources of motivation distribution. Table 4-11. Ambassador sour ces of motivation scores. M SD Intrinsic process Instrumental Self-concept external Self-concept internal Goal internalization 26.77 26.33 26.28 22.78 25.86 .20 .39 .41 .24 .25 Among the 30 questions on the MSI, there were four questions that were consistently ranked higher t han all others. Questions 6 ( M =5.77, SD=.04) asked if participants get excited when working on th ings they enjoy doing. Question 1 ( M =5.59, SD=.06) asked if participants prefer to do things that are fun. Question 16 ( M =5.58, SD=.05) asked if participants get excited wh en they know they will be doing their favorite activities. Question 21 ( M =5.46, SD=.03) asked if partici pants prefer to spend time with people who are fun to be with. All four questions are categorized as Intrinsic Process motives. Question 6 had the lowest range (R =2.00) of all 30 questions. Table 4-12 displays College of Agricultural and Sciences ambassador highest scored MSI questions. 44

PAGE 45

Table 4-12. Highest ranked MSI questions. M SD R Question 6 Question 1 Question 16 Question 21 5.77 5.59 5.58 5.46 .04 .06 .05 .03 2.00 4.00 3.00 6.00 Note: 0=Entirely Disagree 1-2=Somewhat Disagree 3=Neutral 4-5=Somewhat Agree 6=Entirely Agree Objective 2 Objective: To differentiate between sour ces of motivation in male and female collegiate leaders. To determine if there were any differences between male and female collegiate leaders, the researcher used a one-way analysis of variance. Any significance score less than .05 at a 95% confidence interval showed a significant difference between gender and the source of motivation tested. Each of the five sources of motivation was tested with the variable of gender. A significant difference was found between gender and Instrumental motivation ( F =4.86, p <.05). The remaining four sources of motivation, Intrinsic Process ( F =2.76, p >.05), Self-concept External ( F =.00, p >.05), Self-concept Internal ( F =3.18, p >.05), Goal In ternalization ( F =.40, p >.05), showed no difference with gender. Table 4-13 displays the level of significance between gender and each MSI source of motivation. Table 4-13. One-way analysis of varianc e between gender and sources of motivation. F Sig Intrinsic process Instrumental Self-concept external Self-concept internal Goal internalization 2.76 4.86 .00 3.18 .40 .09 .02* .97 .07 .52 45

PAGE 46

Objective 3 Objective: To examine the strength of sources of motivation and relationships between race/ethnicity, leadership experience, and leadership courses taken by the student or currently being taken. For the purpose of data analysis, race/ethnicity was categorized as White, non-Hispanic (n =153), and non-White ( n =24). Data indicated that non-white student ambassador sco red higher on three of the five sources of motivation in cluding Intrinsic Process ( M =27.17, SD=2.18), Instrumental ( M =26.92, SD=4.46), and Goal Internalization (M =26.17, SD=3.20). White student ambassadors scored higher on Self-concept External (M =26.17, SD=4.84) and Selfconcept Internal ( M =22.63, SD=3.42). Table 4-14 further displays mean averages of White and non-White ambassadors motivational sources. Table 4-14. White and non-White sources of motivation scores. M SD Whit e Non-White White Non-White Intrinsic process Instrumental Self-concept external Self-concept internal Goal internalization 26.71 26.24 26.30 22.80 25.82 27.17 26.92 26.17 22.63 26.17 2.67 5.27 5.60 3.20 3.39 2.18 4.46 4.84 3.42 3.20 Non-White race/ethnicities included African American ( n =10), other Hispanic/Latino/Spanish origin ( n =5), Puerto Rican ( n =3), Asian Indian ( n =2), Korean ( n =1), Vietnamese ( n =1), Chinese ( n =1), and other (n =1). Results indicated that the Korean student ambassador scored highest on four of the five sources of motivation. Table 4-15 further explains the mean scores of race/ethnicities not categorized as White. 46

PAGE 47

Table 4-15. Non-White sources of motivation scores. Intrinsic Instrumental SC Ex ternal SC Internal Goal African American Other Hispanic Latino/Spanish Puerto Rican Asian Indian Korean Vietnamese Chinese Other 27.10 27.40 28.33 28.50 26.00 24.00 22.00 30.00 25.90 29.00 27.00 28.50 31.00 31.00 20.00 22.00 25.80 28.00 25.00 24.00 36.00 28.00 21.00 22.00 22.20 22.20 22.00 22.50 29.00 25.00 25.00 19.00 25.90 24.60 28.67 26.50 29.00 23.00 27.00 28.00 There was no statistical significance when looking at Intrinsic Process ( F =.65, p>.05), Instrumental ( F =.35, p >.05), Self-conc ept External (F =.01, p >.05), Self-concept Internal (F =.06, p >.05), and Goal Internalization ( F =.22, p >.05) sources of motivation and race/ethnicity. Table 4-16 reports significant levels for each motivational source and race/ethnicity. Table 4-16. One-way analysis of varianc e between race/ethnicity and motivation. F Sig Intrinsic process Instrumental Self-concept external Self-concept internal Goal internalization .65 .35 .01 .06 .22 .42 .55 .91 .80 .64 Students that reported hav ing prior leadership experience to holding their position as a CALS ambassador scored higher on four of the five sources of motivation. These sources included Intrinsic Process ( M =26.77, SD=2.58), Self-concept External ( M =26.38, SD=5.44), Self-concept Internal ( M =22.83, SD=3.19), and Goal Internalization ( M =25.97, SD=3.23) motivation. Student ambassadors without prior leadership experience scored higher on Instrumental ( M =26.92, SD=6.10). Table 4-17 further explains ambassador prior leadership experience and sources of motivation. 47

PAGE 48

Table 4-17. Students with pr ior leadership experience and students without experience sources of motivation scores. M SD Experience No Experience Experience No Experience Intrinsic process Instrumental Self-concept external Self-concept internal Goal internalization 26.77 26.27 26.38 22.83 25.97 26.54 26.92 25.08 22.15 24.62 2.58 5.10 5.44 3.19 3.23 2.93 6.10 6.22 3.67 4.65 When examining whether there was a di fference among leadership experience and Intrinsic Process ( F =.11, p >.05), Instrumental ( F =.18, p >.05), Self-concept External ( F =.68, p >.05), Self-concept Internal ( F =.53, p >.05), Goal Internalization ( F =1.95, p >.05) sources of motivation, no signifi cance was found between the two variables. Table 4-18 reports significant levels fo r each motivational source and leadership experience. Table 4-18. One-way analysis of vari ance between leadership experience and Motivation. F Sig Intrinsic process Instrumental Self-concept external Self-concept internal Goal internalization .11 .18 .68 .53 1.95 .74 .67 .41 .47 .16 Students that reported havi ng taken leadership courses in the past or were currently taking leadership courses scored higher on three of the five sources of motivation. These sources in cluded Intrinsic Process ( M =26.96, SD=2.63) Instrumental ( M =26.82, SD=5.22), and Self-concept External ( M =26.56, SD=5.48) motivation. Student ambassadors without le adership education score d higher on Self-concept Internal (M =22.82, SD=3.19) and Goal Internalization ( M =25.99, SD=3.44) motivation. 48

PAGE 49

Table 4-19 displays the sources of motiva tion scores for students who reported they had prior leadership education and those that did not. Table 4-19. Students with and without leadership education MSI scores. M SD Leadership Education None Leadership Experience None Intrinsic process Instrumental SC external SC internal Goal internal 26.96 26.82 26.56 22.74 25.75 26.56 25.78 25.98 22.82 25.99 2.63 5.22 5.48 3.26 3.30 2.58 5.08 5.52 3.19 3.44 When examining whether there was a difference among leadership education taken or currently being taken and Intrinsic Process ( F =1.03, p >.05), Instrumental ( F =1.73, p >.05), Self-concept External ( F =.50, p >.05), Self-concept Internal ( F =.03, p >.05), Goal Internalization ( F =.22, p >.05) sources of moti vation, no significant difference was found between variables. Table 420 reports significant levels for each motivational source and leadership educatio n taken or currently being taken. Table 4-20. One-way analysis of vari ance between leadership education and Motivation. F Sig Intrinsic process Instrumental Self-concept external Self-concept internal Goal internalization 1.03 1.73 .50 .03 .22 .31 .19 .48 .87 .64 All 11 southeastern College of Agricultur al and Life Sciences ambassador teams responded, resulting in a total of 177 returned questionnaires. Data was then entered into Windows Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Mean scores, frequencies, and one-way of variance (ANOVA) we re then calculated by the researcher. 49

PAGE 50

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECCOMENDATIONS Introduction Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this study was to determine if male and female collegiate leaders are motivated differently. To do so, the researcher sought to compare the sources of motivation between male college female lea ders. To guide this study, the following objectives were established: Determine the source of motivation am ong female and male collegiate leaders. Differentiate between sources of motivation in male and female collegiate leaders. Examine the strength of sources of motivation and relationships between race/ethnicity, leadership experience, and leadership courses taken by the student or currently being taken. Methodology A quantitative perspective was taken for the methods of this study. The study utilized a descriptive survey design accordin g to Ary, Jacobs, and Razaveih (2002). The researcher established a relationship with ambassador team advisors, who agreed to administer questionnaires. Questionnaire cons isted of Barbuto and Scholls (1998) Motivation Sources Inventory (MSI) along with additional questions of participants gender, age, race/ethnicity, class classification, prior leadership experience, and prior or currently being taken leadership education courses. The questionnaire was proven reliable and valid prior to this research but because the MSI was being used on a new population of college student leader s, the researcher tested re liability of each of the 30 questions and eliminated three (questions 4, 10, 11) to increase Cronbach Alpha to an acceptable score. 50

PAGE 51

Summary of Findings Demographics Demographics included in this study were: gender, age, race/ethnicity, class classification, prior leadership experiences, and prior or currently being taken leadership education courses. All demographics were se lf-reported by partici pating ambassadors. An overwhelming 68% ( n =120) of the participating student ambassadors at southeastern Colleges of Agricultural and Life Sciences were female, 32% ( n =57) male. The majority of ambassadors were 20 (29.94%, n =53) and 21 (37.85%, n =67) years old. Although there was a diverse range of race/et hnicities present, resu lts showed that 86% ( n =153) of ambassadors reporte d being of White race/ethnici ty. Among class ranks, the senior class (44.07%, n =78) was the most re presented student class. An overwhelmingly 92.66% ( n =164) ambassadors reported having some type of prior leadership experience either holding an organizations Ch air, Chair-Elect, President, Vice President, President-Elect, C aptain, or Co-Captain position, being held in both high school (47.07%, n =297) and college (52.93%, n =334), primarily at a local level (81.93%, n =517). The amount of leadership edu cation courses taken or currently being taken by ambassadors within their College of Agricultural and Life Sciences was over half of the participants (52.54%). Re sponses indicated that Communication and Leadership (29.38%, n =52) had been taken most of ten by students, and Global Leadership (3.39%, n =6) was the least taken course among participants. Objective 1 Females scored highest in Intrinsic Process motivation (27.86%, n =39) and males scored highest in Instru mental motivation (36.76%, n =25). Both males (32.35%, n =22) and females (26.43%, n =37) scored second highest on Self-concept External 51

PAGE 52

motivation. Both females (.71%, n =1) and males (0%, n =0) scored lowest on Selfconcept Internal motivation. Objective 1 sought to determine the s ource of motivation among collegiate leaders. Responses indicat ed that Intrinsic Process motivation had the highest mean average ( M =26.77) with the lowest standard deviation (SD=.20). Instrumental ( M =26.33, SD=.39) and Self-concept External ( M =26.28, SD=.41) motivation followed closely behind, along with Goal Internalization (M =25.86, SD=.25) motivation. The lowest ranked source of motivation among amba ssadors was Self-concept Internal ( M =22.78, SD=.24). Data analysis revealed that the four highest answered questions were all Intrinsic Process motivational source questions. Questions 6, ( M =5.77, SD =.04), 1 ( M =5.59, SD=.06), 16 ( M =5.58, SD=.05), and 21 ( M =5.46, SD=.03) were all questions related to the participants excitement about doing acti vities that are considered fun and enjoyable, as well as spending time with others that were fun to be around. Objective 2 Objective 2 sought to differentiate betw een sources of motivation in male and female collegiate leaders. Although differences were not significant between Intrinsic Process ( F =2.76, p >.05), Self-concept External ( F =.00, p >.05), Self-concept Internal ( F =3.18, p >.05), and Goal Internalization ( F =.40, p >.05), one significant relationship showed that gender does not make a differenc e on a collegiate leaders Instrumental motivation ( F =4.86, p <.05). Objective 3 Objective 3 sought to exam ine the strength of diffe rence between sources of motivation and race/ethnicity, leadership ex perience, and leadership courses taken by 52

PAGE 53

the student or currently being taken. Da ta indicated that students who had prior leadership experience scored higher on all but one source of motivation, Instrumental. Responses indicated that that there was not a st atistical significance difference between sources of Intrinsic Process ( F =.65, p >.05), Instrumental ( F =.35, p >.05), Self-concept External ( F =.01, p >.05), Self-concept Internal ( F =.06, p >.05), and Goal Internalization ( F =.22, p >.05) motivation and race/ethnici ty, sources of Intrinsic ( F =.11, p >.05), Instrumental (F =.18, p >.05), Self-concept External ( F =.66, p >.05), Self-concept Internal ( F =.53, p >.05), Goal Internalization (F =1.95, p >.05) motivation and leadership experience, or sources of Intrinsic ( F =1.03, p >.05), Instrumental ( F =1.73, p >.05), Selfconcept External ( F =.50, p >.05), Self-concept Internal ( F =.03, p >.05), Goal Internalization ( F =.22, p >.05) motivation and prior or current leadership education. Conclusions This studys entire population was collegiate leaders. Although the study received a high response rate (65.10%) of the selected population sample ( n =177), generalizability was limited due to the convenient sample which only included AAAEs Southern Regions CALS Land-Grant univers ity ambassador teams. Results are generalizable to CALS collegiate leaders, mo re directly CALS ambassadors in the southeastern US region. The majority of CALS ambassado r teams are overwhelmingly female. CALS ambassador teams are evenly diverse in age and class rankings. Although there are many different ra ce/ethnicities identified among CALS ambassador teams, student ambass adors are primarily White. CALS ambassadors have had prior leadership experience, specifically at the local level. 53

PAGE 54

Half of CALS ambassadors take advantage of leadership courses offered in their college and leadership courses are not being evenly taken or encouraged to take by CALS. CALS ambassadors are primarily Intrinsicl y motivated and least motivated by Selfconcept Internally. Gender impacts whether or not the student is motivation Instrumentally. Males are more Instrumentally motivated and females are more Intrinsicly motivated. The students race/ethnicity prior leadership experienc e or leadership education does not have an impact on how the CA LS ambassador is motivated. Discussions and Implications Females are seeking and retaining leadersh ip positions in college. A description of the population sample indicated that 120 (68%) of the entire 177 participants were female. This conclusion follows the trend that females are more likely than males to take part in student clubs (Sax & Arms, 2008), espec ially if they were involved in similar student organizations while in high school (Astin, 2004). It seems that females are getting an earlier start at holding leadership positions in grade school. This could be because also around the same time males ar e becoming very active in sports and athletics and may not be able to hold leadership positions in student organizations while also partaking in high school sports that require after school practice. This conclusion also supports prior liter ature suggesting that females raised in more liberal households and that have been exposed to a more forward thinking perspective will be more aware of ways they c an become involved in organizations that match their personal perspective (Biddix, 2010). Because females enter college with a lower self-confidence than males (Sax & Arms, 2008), taking part in a leadership position may be helping gain more self-c onfidence among young collegiate female 54

PAGE 55

leaders. This finding supports prior literatur e that states students who pursue leadership roles are more successful in further devel oping leadership skills (Cooper, et al., 1994). Although this finding reflects the current statistic that 58% of college enrollments are females (King, 2006), CALS ambassador advisors should continue to strive and obtain more male ambassadors to serve on t heir teams. Because this study shows that males are motivated more by incentives and rewards, by offering students boastful rights or non-materialistic prizes, such as an opportunity or pass from work, male ambassadors may be more likely to get involved and recruit other males to join. CALS ambassador teams are diverse in age of students and class ranking distribution. The description statistics displayed a mean of 20.6 years old of participants and a mean of 3.3 that indica ted an average class classification of participants was a junior, 3rd year student. Although there are many di fferent race/ethni cities identified among CALS ambassador t eams, data indicated that 153 (86.4%) student ambassadors are White. This discovery supports literature indicating that there are little cross-cultural understandings on college campuses and there is a need to offer more opportunities for international students to become more active within their university and ultimately raise the awareness of crosscultural understandings (Sherry, Thomas & Chui, 2009). CALS ambassadors have had prior leadership experience, specifically at the local level. The data indicated 164 (92.7%) ambassadors claimed they had held leadership position prior to becoming a leader within their college. Leadership experience is the highest percentage of any characteristic am ong participants Although data did not indicate a significant difference between l eadership experience and the sources of 55

PAGE 56

motivation of the student, participants with prior leadership experience scored above average on four of the five sources of mo tivation. Because our population sample was primarily female, this supports the literature that females who become activist leaders in college held similar positions whil e in high school (Astin, 2004). Half of CALS ambassadors take advantage of leadership courses offered in their college. Data indicated that 93 (52.5%) of participants had taken or were currently taking a leadership course within their CA LS. CALS leadership courses being taken by students are not evenly distributed. Among t he 175 reported leadership courses taken by students, 52 (29.7%) were a Communi cation and Leadership course and only six (3.4%) of all courses reported been taken were a Global Leadership course. Male and female collegiate leaders are Instrumentally motivated differently. A significant score of .029 was found at the p <.05, 95% confidence interval. This indicates that gender plays a role in whether the student is motivated by activities that promise rewards and tangible incentives. This discovery supports literature stating that women do not seek to own their own business or accu mulate wealth as much as men do (Sax & Arms, 2008), and that women seem to be mo re concerned if the work they do is meaningful (Biddix, 2010). Al though the finding was not significant, the majority of females were motivated intrinsically, that su pports literature finding s that females prefer work that is also fun (Biddix, 2010). The students race/ethnicity prior leadership experienc e or leadership education does not have an impact on how the CALS ambass ador is motivated. Data indicated no difference existing between the students source of motivation and the students 56

PAGE 57

race/ethnicity, whether or not the student had leadership exper ience, or any leadership education. National Research Agenda The study sought to further The National Research Agenda: Agricultural Education and Communication 2007-2010 by moving forwar d research priority areas (RPA): RPA 1: Develop and disseminate effective leadership education programs. Discovering how leadership education prog rams can further develop leadership skills in higher education, communities agribusiness, youth, along with allied organizations through design and impl ementation on both a national and international level. This study presented an instrument (MSI) t hat can be utilized in leadership education program s to shed positive light on gender leadership differences. RPA 2: Improve the success of students enrolled in agricultural and life sciences academic and technical programs. This study made an impact on examin ing how students enhance leadership abilities through holding leadership positions in student organizations. RPA 2: Support leadership opportuniti es for underrepresented populations. Identifying how inclusion of underrepresented populations within leadership organizations can enrich higher education, communities, agribusiness, youth, along with allied organizations on both a national and international level. Through this study attention was brought to the small number of non-White students serving in southeastern CALS as student ambassadors. Recommendations Recommendations for Practice CALS student organizations should pr omote the overall mi ssion and purpose of the organization, as well as offer incentives and rewards to attract both instrumentally and intrinsi cly motivated students. CALS student organizations should impl ement a work pattern model for college activist organizations, which guides student organizations through steps of recruiting diverse groups of students to get involved, stay involved, and get others involved (Biddix 2010). Steps included in the work pattern include: initial recruiting, the first meeting, electronic follow-up, planning an event, advertising the event, and the event occurring. 57

PAGE 58

CALS should strive to seek and reta in student leaders with diverse ethnic and racial background and promote cross-cult ural differences because international students that do not gain social s upport and involvement may not succeed (Sherry, Thomas & Chui, 2010) when facing common struggles that international students face such as language barriers, being homesick, discrimination, financial problems, cultural barriers, and feel ing alienated (Yeh & Inose, 2003). CALS should hold lingual seminars to hel p international students with their most prominent struggle, to become more fluent in English (Sherry, Thomas, & Chui, 2010). CALS faculty and staff should continue to encourage female involvement in collegiate leadership and student organizati ons. Females still face inequality when choosing a major (Astin, 1993), and at work salaries (Jacobs, 1996). High school student organizations should be targeted for CALS leadership organizations and leadership positions recruitment. CALS ambassador advisors, faculty, sta ff, and Dean should be aware of the small numbers of males participati ng in CALS ambassadors. Global leadership courses should ca mpaign for more enrollments of CALS students. To cater to student moti ves and engage both males and females, CALS leadership should develop courses that is fun and enjoyable and offers incentives for students. CALS should utilize Barbutos Motivational Source Inventory in the classroom to assist students in discovering and lear ning about their personal sources of motivation and how it impacts how they interact with others and participate in organizations. Programs and policies should be regularly evaluated to consider difference male and female experiences and how those experiences have an impact on outcomes (Sax & Arms, 2008). Recommendations for Future Research The methodology of this study should be repeated with a larger population sample that can equally represent both genders along with race/ethnicities. A qualitative study should be conducted to further examine the motives of collegiate leaders and to ensure conclusions. The methodology of this study should be repeated in remaining regions of CALS ambassador teams, alternative college am bassador teams, as well as the 4-H youth organization. 58

PAGE 59

59 A more in-depth study examining why males are not seeking and retaining leadership positions within thei r CALS should be conducted. Further research should be conducted to examine student interest in leadership courses offered by CALS. A study should be conducted to examine the success of utilizing a work pattern model for college activist organizations in the recruitment process. A study should be conducted to examine w hat barriers are preventing international students to partake in CALS l eadership ambassador teams. Summary The studys purpose and objectives were introduced once again in Chapter 5. Chapter 4 results were then summarized and conclusions drawn and presented. A discussion of the conclusions was presented next in Chapter 5, alongside prior literature. The conclusions were tied back The National Research Agenda for Agriculture Education and Communication. Finally, the researcher offered recommendations for practice and future research.

PAGE 60

APPENDIX A UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD IRB 02 APPROVAL 60

PAGE 61

61

PAGE 62

APPENDIX B OBTAINING PERMISSION TO USE MSI FROM DR. J. BARBUTO Dear Dr. Barbuto, May 19, 2010 My name is Andrea Andrews, and I am a graduate student at the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences at the University of Florida. I am currently planning on conducting my Masters thesis research study on comparing sources of motivation of female collegiate leaders, and am very interested in possibly using your Motivation Sources Inventory as an instrument and would greatly appreciate your permission to do so. I am interested in discovering if there is a common motivation source in female collegiate leaders, and am completing a census of an on campus leadership development program to help answer my research question. I would be happy to answer any questions you have as to the purpose or procedures of this study and look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Andrea L. Andrews Andrea L. Andrews Graduate Student University of Florida Department Agricultural Education & Communications 406Rolfs Hall | Gainesville, FL 32611 0270 352 316 1036 | andreaa@ufl.edu Dear Andrea, May 21, 2010 Your research topic sounds in teresting. Good luck with your pr oject. The motivation sources inventory is a free to use (for research) instrument so please go ahead and do your research. Please let me know what you find. We are always interested in keeping track of studies conducted using the MSI. Best wishes, Jay Barbuto John E. Barbuto, Jr., Ph.D. Associate Professor of Leadership Coordinator, Leadership Studi es Doctoral Specialization 303c Ag Hall University of Nebraska Lincoln Lincoln, NE 68583-0709 (402) 472-8736 jbarbuto@unl.edu 62

PAGE 63

APPENDIX C INSTRUCTIONS FOR AMINISTERI NG AMBASSADOR ADVISORS INSTRUCTIONS 1. Please have ambassadors read and sign th e attached informed consent form prior to completing the Motivation Sour ces Inventory questionnaire. There is also an attached copy for you to keep if wanted. 2. Have ambassadors complete the 2 page Motivation Sources Inventory questionnaires. 3. Collect completed questionnaires and return in the provided addressed envelope by November 1st, 2010 or as soon as possible after. Feel free to fold questionnaires if needed to fit into return envelope. 63

PAGE 64

APPENDIX D MSI QUESTIONNAIRE ADMINISTER ED TO STUDENT AMBASSADORS MSI (MOTIVATION SOURCES INVENTORY) The purpose of this survey is to describe the things that best motivate you. Rate your level of agreement with each of the following statements. There are not right or wrong answers just your answers. Read each statement and answer honestly about yourself. Entirely Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Entirely Disagree 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 _____ 1.I prefer to do things that are fun. _____ 2.I like to be rewarded for extra responsibilities. _____ 3.It is important that others appreciate the work I do. _____ 4.Decisions I make reflect my personal standards. _____ 5.I work hard for a company if I agree with its mission. _____ 6.I get excited when working on things I enjoy doing. _____ 7.I will work harder if I get paid for the extra effort. _____ 8.I like to get recognition for a job well done. _____ 9.It is important that my work requires my unique skills. _____ 10. I need to believe in a cause before I work hard. _____ 11. I often put off work so I can do something better. _____ 12. I work harder if I know my efforts will lead to better rewards. _____ 13. I work harder if I know my efforts will be praised. _____ 14. I work harder if I know my skills are needed. _____ 15. When I believe in the cause, I work hard to help it succeed. _____ 16. I get excited when I know Ill be doing my favorite activities. 64

PAGE 65

_____ 17. I work hard to find ways to earn more income. _____ 18. I am motivated when people make me feel appreciated. _____ 19. My favorite tasks are those that are the most challenging. _____ 20. I work hard when I feel a sense of purpose in the work. _____ 21. I prefer to spend time with people who are fun to be with. _____ 22. I like to find ways to earn more money. _____ 23. I work hard on the job to strengthen my reputation. _____ 24. I prefer to do things that give me a sense of achievement. _____ 25. I am energized when I agree with an organizations purpose. _____ 26. When choosing jobs, I consider which job will be most fun. _____ 27. I like to keep looking for better business opportunities. _____ 28. I give my best effort when I know others will notice. _____ 29. I am motivated when my skills are needed. _____ 30. My motivation will be high when I believe in what Im doing. Please answer the following questions: 1. Please check appropriate gender: Male ___ Female ___ 2. Please circle the most appropriate Race/Ethnicity: White Asian Indian Japanese Guamanian or Chamorro Puerto Rican African American Chinese Korean Other Pacific Islander Another Hispanic, Latino/Spanish origin Samoan Filipino Vietnamese Cuban Some other Race/Ethnicity American Indian or Alaska Native Other Asian Native Hawaiian Mexican, Mexican American, Chicano 65

PAGE 66

3. Age ____ (fill in your age as a number) 4. Classification (please circle correct answer) Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior 5. Please include leadership positions held during high school and college, the title of the position, name of the organization, and level of service. High School or College Title of Position List only Chair, Chair Elect, President, Vice President, President Elect, Captain, Co Captain. Name of Organization Level of Service List only local, regional, state or national. 6. Have you completed or are you currently enrolled in leadership courses offered by your college of agricultural and life sciences? If so, please circle the related courses below: Interpersonal Leading Change or Change Leadership Leadership Development Theory Learning Organizations Communication & Leadership Ethics Global Leadership Other: 66

PAGE 67

APPENDIX E EMAIL UPDATE TO ADVISORS FOLLOWING PACKET MAILOUTS September 1, 2010 Hi Erin, Just wanted to let you know that the questionnaires are in the mail! The questionnaires are very self explanatory, should be easy for students to understand, and should take an estimated 10 minutes to complete. Please make sure that each ambassador signs the attached informed consent form before completing the survey if they chose to participate. I will also include a stamped envelope to return the questionnaires in. Thank you again for contributing to the research of collegiate leadership, your participation means so much! Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns, my contact information is located at the bottom of this email. Best wishes! Andrea Andrews Andrea L. Andrews Graduate Student University of Florida Department Agricultural Education & Communications 406 Rolfs Hall | Gainesville, FL 32611 0270 352 316 1036 | andreaa@ufl.edu 67

PAGE 68

APPENDIX F UF IRB CONSENT FORM SIGNED BY EACH PARTICIPANT INFORMED CONSENT Please read this consent document carefully before you decide to participate in this study Protocol Title: Factors influencing male and female leadership in collegiate agricultural organizations Purpose of the research study: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the sources of motivation in collegiate ambassadors throughout colleges of agricult ural and life sciences in southeastern universities in the United States. What you will be asked to do in the study: You will be asked to complete the Motivation Sources Inventory survey. This survey will ask questions ab out things that motivate you, along with your demographics and prior leadership experiences. Time required: 15 minutes Risks and Benefits: No more than minimal risk. There are no di rect benefits to you for participating in the study Compensation: None Confidentiality: Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. Your information will be assigned a code number, so no one will know what your responses were. Your name will not be used in any report. Voluntary participation: Your participation in this study is comp letely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating. Right to withdraw from the study: You have the right to withdraw from the study at anytime without consequence. Whom to contact if you have questions about the study: Andrea Andrews, Graduate Student, Department of Agriculture Education and Communica tion, 406 Rolfs Hall PO BOX 110540, Gainesville FL 32611-0540. Phone: 352-316-1036, Email: Andreaa@ufl.edu or Dr. Nicole Stedman, Associate Professor, Department of Agriculture Education and Communication, 406 Rolfs Hall PO BOX 110540, Gainesville FL 32611-0540. Phone: 352-392-0502 x247, Email: NStedman@ufl.edu Whom to contact about your rights as a research participant in the study: IRB02 Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gain esville, FL 32611-2250; phone 392-0433. Agreement: I have read the procedure described above. I voluntarily agree to participate in the procedure and I have received a copy of this description. Participant: ___________________________________________ Date: _________________ Principal Investigator: ___________________________________ Date: _________________ 68

PAGE 69

LIST OF REFERENCES American Association for Agricultural Educators. (2010). Constitution and Bylaws of the American Association for Agricultural Education. Retrieved from http://aaaeonline.org/file s/aaae/SRconst.pdf Agnew, D. M., & Kennedy, D. (2005). Thirteen years of student leadership conferences: lessons learned. North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture, 49, 41-45. College of Agricultural and Life Scienc es University of Florida. (2010). CALS Ambassadors. Retrieved from http://cals.ufl.edu/current_s tudents/ambassadors.shtml Cooper, D. L. Healy, M. A. & Simpson, J. (1994). Student dev elopment through involvement: Specific changes over time. Journal of College Student Development 35, 98-102. Astin, A. W. (2004). The American freshman: National norms for Fall 2004 Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Cooperative Institutional Research Program. Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Barbuto, J., & Scholl, R. W. (1998). Mo tivation sources inventory: Development and validation of new scales to meas ure an integrative taxonomy of motivation. Psychological Reports, 82, 1011-1022. Barbuto, J. E., Fritz, S. M., & Marx, D. (2002). A fiel d of experiemental of two measures of work motivation as predi ctors of leaders' influence tactics. The Journal of Social Psychology 601-616. Barbuto, J., & Scholl, R. W. (1998). Mo tivation sources inventory: Development and validation of new scales to meas ure an integrative taxonomy of motivation. Psychological reports 1011-1022. Barrett, L.A. (1983). Leadersip education for agricultural students. North American Colleges and Teacher s and Agriculture, 6-8. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press. Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industry, military, and educational impact. Mahwah: Erlbaum. 69

PAGE 70

Biddix, J. P. (2010). Relati onal leadership and technol ogy: A study of activist college women leaders. NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education, Vol3 (1) 25-48. Buttel, F. H., & Goldberger, J. R. (2002). Gender and agriculture science: Evidence from two surveys of land-grant scientists. Rural Sociology 2445. Byrnes, J. P., Miller, D. C., & Schafer, W. D. (1999). Gender differences in risk taking: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125 367-383. Carli, L. L. (1990). Ge nder, language, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59 941-951. Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of mother ing: Psychoanalysis and the sociology of gender. Berkeley: University of California Press. Commission, F. G. (1995). Good for business: Making full use of the nation's capital: The environement al scan: A fact-finding report of the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office Crowe, J. A., & Goldberger, J. R. (2009) University-Industry relationships in colleges of agriculture and life scienc es: The role of women faculty. Rural Sociology 498-524. Delinder, J. V. (2009). Gender and the civil rights movement. Sociology Compass 986-999. D'Haem, J., & Krueger, D. (1993) The challenge to lead mo tivates nontraditional students. The Agricultural Education Magazine 9-10. Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2003). T he female advantage: An evaluation of the evidence. The Leadership Quarterly 14 807-834. Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (19 90). Gender and leadershi p style: A metaanalysis. Psychological Bulletin 233-256. Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational, transactional, and la issez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin 569591. Eagly, A. H., Makhijani M. G., & Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111 3-22. Edgar, K. (2005). "Tough as nails and warm as toast", the complexity of female leadership styles. Contemporary Topics in Laboratory Animal Science 60-61. 70

PAGE 71

Fishlock, D. (2010). Where are the Harrisburg's area female leaders? Harrisburg: The Patriot News. Fritz, S., Townsend, C., Hoover, T., Weeks, W., Carter, R., & Nietfeldt, A. (2003). An analysis of leadership offerings in collegiate agricultural education departments. North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture 1822. Girl Scout Research Institute. (2008). Change it up! What girls say about redefining leadership. New York: Girl Scouts of the United States of America. Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1994). Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business revolution. New York: Harper Business. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The Motivation to Work (2nd ed). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Hoover, T. S., & Dunigan, A. H. (2004). Leadership characteristics and professional development needs of collegiate student organizations. North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture 22-26. Jacobs, J. A. (1996). Gender inequality and higher education. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 153-185. Kezar, A. (2000, July-August). Pluralistic leadership: Bringing diverse voices to the table. About Campus, 6-11. Klein, E. E. (2000). The impact of information technology on leadership opportunities for women: The le veling of the playing field. Journal of Leadership Studies, 7 88-98. Komives, S. R., Lucas, N ., & McMahon, T. R. (1998). Exploring leadership: For college students who want to make a difference. San Francisco: JosseyBass. Lauterbach, K. E., & Weiner B. J. (1996). Dynamics of upward influence: how male and female managers get their way. Leadership Quarterly 87-107. Leonard, N. H., Beauvais, L. L., & Scholl, R. W. (1999). Work motivation: The incorporation of self-c oncept-based processes. Human Relations 969998. Lerner, H. G. (1989). The dance of intimacy: A woman's guide to courageous acts of change in key relationships. New York: Harper & Row. 71

PAGE 72

Locke, E. A., & Henne, D. (1986). Work motivation theories. In International review of industryal and organization psychology (pp. 1-35). Chichester: Wiley. Lussier, R. N., & Achua, C. F. (2010). Leadership: theory, application, & skill development, 4e. Mason: South-West ern Cengage Learning. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A t heory of human motivation. Psychological Review, vol 50 370-396. Maume, J. D. (1999). Occ upational segregation and the caeer mobility of white men and women. Social Forces 1433-1459. McClelland, D. C. (1987). Human Motivation. Boston: Cambridge University Press. McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidencebased inquiry. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education. Organization, N. F. (2010). FFA & Agriculture Statistics Retrieved June 20, 2010, from National FFA Organization: http://www.ffa.org/index.cfm?method=c_about.stats Osborne, E. (2007). National Research Agenda: Agricultural Education and Communication. Pennington, P. (2005) The leadership pie: Grab your piece before it's gone. Journal of Leadership Education, 4(1), 75-78. Ricketts, J. C., Osborne, E. W., & Rudd, R. D. (2004). Female leadership in rural Florida FFA chapters. Journal of Agricultural Education 42-53. Ricketts, J. C., Osborne, E. W., & Rudd, R. D. (2003). The effect of instructional delivery methods on the critical thinki ng disposition of distance learners and traditional on-campus learners. Proceedings of the Southern Agricultural Educati on Research Conference (pp. 421-424). Rohs, F. R., & Anderson, K. S. (2001) Motivational needs of middle grade students enrolled in agricultu ral education in Georgia. Journal of Agricultural Education 42-52. Romano, C. R. (1996). A qualitative study of women student leaders. Journal of College Student Development, 37, 676-683. Rost, J. C. (1993). Leadership deve lopment in the new millennium. The Journal of Leadership Studies, 1(1), 91-110. 72

PAGE 73

Rule, N. O., & Ambady, N. (2009). She's got the look: Inferences from female chief executive officers' fa ces predict their success. Sex Roles DOI:10.1007/s11199-009-9658-9. Sax, J. L., & Arms, E. (2008). Gender differences over the span of college: Challenges to achieving equity. NAPA The Journal About Women in Higher Education, 23-48. Seevers, B., & Dormody, T. J. (1994). Predicting youth life leadership skills development among senior 4-H me mbers: A tristate study. Journal of Agricultural Education, 35(3) 64-69. Sharpe, R. (2000, Novemeber 20). Businessweek.com. Retrieved May 20, 2010, from As leaders, women rule: http://www.businessweek.com/ 2000/00_47/b3708145.htm?scriptFramed Sherry, M., Thomas, P., & Chui, W. H. (2010). International students: A vulnerable student population. Higher Education 60, 33-46. Shertzer, J. E., & Schuh, J. H. (2004). College student perceptions of leadership: Empowering others and constraining beliefs. NASPA Journal, 42(1), 111131. Statistics, U. B. (1982). Labor force statistics derived from the current population survey: A databook (Vol. 1: Bulletin 2096). Washington: U.S. Department of Labor. Teasley, C. (Retrieved May 8, 2010). Women's rights in the 1960s' America. Retrieved May 8, 2010, from Helium: http://www.helium.com/item s/1174253-womens-rights-1960s-inamerica?page=2 U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). United States Census 2010: Explore the Form. Retrieved August 2, 2010, from http://2010.census.gov/2010census /about/interactive-form.php. Wilson, M. C. (2004). Closing the leadership gap: Why women can and must help run the world New York: Peguins Books. Women in the work force during WWII (2010). Retrieved May 10, 2010, from The National Archives: http://www.archives.gov/southeast/education/resources-by-state/wwiiwomen.html Yeh, C.J. & Inose, M. (2003). International students' reported English fluency, social support satisfaction, and social connectedness as predictors of acculturative stress. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 16(1), 15-28. 73

PAGE 74

74 Zielinski, M. B. (1999). A case study of gender in high school student government leadership and a test of Rotters' and Bandura's theories of social learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation: University of New York at Buffalo.

PAGE 75

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Andrea Lauren Andrews was born in Alac hua, Florida. Being an eight generation Floridian, she grew up on a family farm in North Florida and graduated from Union County High School and Lake City Community College in 2005. Following her high school diploma and Associate of Arts degree, she served as the Florida FFA Association Area II State Vice-President fr om June 2005 to June 2006. After taking a year off from school and work to serve wit h Florida FFA, Andr ea sought a degree within the College of Agricultural and Life Scienc es at the University of Florida. While completing her bachelor degree, she served as a College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Ambassador and in May 2009 graduated with a Bachelor of Sciences in family, youth, and community sciences with minors in leadership, non-profits, and education. Upon graduation, Andrea joined the Agri culture Education and Communications Department at the University of Florida, focusing her degree on agricultural leadership. During her masters degree, she served as a graduate assistant in department courses AEC 3030 Effective Oral Communication and AEC 3413 Interpersonal Leadership. In May 2011, Andrea graduated with a Master of Science degree in agricultural leadership and minor in non-profit organizations. 75