<%BANNER%>

Leadership Motivational Factors of Students in Agricultural Collegiate Organizations

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042967/00001

Material Information

Title: Leadership Motivational Factors of Students in Agricultural Collegiate Organizations
Physical Description: 1 online resource (99 p.)
Language: english
Creator: SCANGA,MICAH D
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: AGRICULTURAL -- AGRICULTURE -- COLLEGE -- COLLEGIATE -- LEADERSHIP -- MOTIVATION -- ORGANIZATION -- SERVANT -- STUDENTS -- UNIVERSITY
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: The four years spent in college are some of the most important developmental time periods for leaders in the agricultural industry. This research measures the leadership motivational factors of students in colligate organizations in colleges of agriculture. This study will aid in motivating students to seek out and accept leadership roles. The theoretical frameworks used in this study were Self-determination Theory and Servant Leadership Theory. The population of this of all undergraduates in student organizations in the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences (CALS) at the University of Florida (UF) for the fall of 2010 semester. Participants were administered a researcher designed face-to-face survey. Eight constructs were measured during this study. The three constructs associated with Self-determination Theory were autonomy, competence, and relatedness. The five constructs associated with Servant Leadership were altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship. The study found that of the three constructs measured under Self-determination Theory, relatedness was the only construct that was statistically significant with distinguishing leaders versus non-leaders. Furthermore, the study found that of the five constructs measured under Servant Leadership, altruistic calling and organizational stewardship were the two constructs of servant leadership that had statistically significant differences between leaders and non-leaders. The study found that of the three constructs measured under Self-determination Theory, relatedness was the only construct that was statistically significant with distinguishing leaders versus non-leaders in collegiate agricultural organizations. Furthermore, the study found that of the five constructs measured under Servant Leadership, altruistic calling and organizational stewardship were the two constructs of servant leadership that had statistically significant differences between leaders and non-leaders. These results indicate the greater connection an individual has between members of their organizations the more likely they are to be motivated to take leadership positions. The results also indicate leaders possess higher levels of altruistic calling and organizational stewardship.
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 MICAH D SCANGA.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Carter, Hannah Sewell.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0042967:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0042967/00001

Material Information

Title: Leadership Motivational Factors of Students in Agricultural Collegiate Organizations
Physical Description: 1 online resource (99 p.)
Language: english
Creator: SCANGA,MICAH D
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: AGRICULTURAL -- AGRICULTURE -- COLLEGE -- COLLEGIATE -- LEADERSHIP -- MOTIVATION -- ORGANIZATION -- SERVANT -- STUDENTS -- UNIVERSITY
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: The four years spent in college are some of the most important developmental time periods for leaders in the agricultural industry. This research measures the leadership motivational factors of students in colligate organizations in colleges of agriculture. This study will aid in motivating students to seek out and accept leadership roles. The theoretical frameworks used in this study were Self-determination Theory and Servant Leadership Theory. The population of this of all undergraduates in student organizations in the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences (CALS) at the University of Florida (UF) for the fall of 2010 semester. Participants were administered a researcher designed face-to-face survey. Eight constructs were measured during this study. The three constructs associated with Self-determination Theory were autonomy, competence, and relatedness. The five constructs associated with Servant Leadership were altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship. The study found that of the three constructs measured under Self-determination Theory, relatedness was the only construct that was statistically significant with distinguishing leaders versus non-leaders. Furthermore, the study found that of the five constructs measured under Servant Leadership, altruistic calling and organizational stewardship were the two constructs of servant leadership that had statistically significant differences between leaders and non-leaders. The study found that of the three constructs measured under Self-determination Theory, relatedness was the only construct that was statistically significant with distinguishing leaders versus non-leaders in collegiate agricultural organizations. Furthermore, the study found that of the five constructs measured under Servant Leadership, altruistic calling and organizational stewardship were the two constructs of servant leadership that had statistically significant differences between leaders and non-leaders. These results indicate the greater connection an individual has between members of their organizations the more likely they are to be motivated to take leadership positions. The results also indicate leaders possess higher levels of altruistic calling and organizational stewardship.
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 MICAH D SCANGA.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Carter, Hannah Sewell.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0042967:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 L EADERSHIP MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS OF STUDENTS I N AGRICULTURAL COLLEGIATE ORGANIZATIONS By MICAH DAVID SCANGA A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2011

PAGE 2

2 2011 Micah David Scanga

PAGE 3

3 To my Father, if I amount to a portion of the man you are, I will be a great man.

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Tho se most influential in life act as a strong foundation during times of personal and professional hardship My Father, you are a leader, a role model, a friend, a truly great man, thank you for all you do, no one has had a greater impact on my life. To m y sister, thank you for your con tinued support and confidence in me. I would also like to thank my extended family, although I do not always tak e time to say it; I value and l o ve you all. Specifically, to my Grandparents, Ben and Grandma Rose, you both are inspiring to me. To my committee chair, Dr. Hannah Carter, thank you for countless hours of I was very fortunate to have a chair who cared as much as you do looking out for my best interests. Thank yo u to my committee members, Dr. Michael Olexa and Dr. Nicole Stedman, thank you for your wisdom and insightfulness during this proces s. I was truly blessed you chose to sit on this committee. Dr. Grady Roberts, thank you for your guidance and assistance, th rough my graduate experience you ha ve opened so many doors for me. I will never be able to repay how much you have given me. This research would not have been possible without the support of the Agricultural Education and Communication faculty and staff. Thank you for bringing me into your department and lives; it has been my home Thank you to the faculty and staff of the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Deans office. So much of my personal and leadership was developed in opportunities I

PAGE 5

5 had while working with you all. Your assistance and willingness to assist with this research was vital. In addition, I would like to recognize the brothers of Alpha Gamma Rho and my office co w orkers over the past two years providing me with support, stress relief, and hours of companionship I will never forget. The educators and coaches in my life have made a tremendous impact on my cognitive, emotional, physical, and behavioral development. Thank you for all you have done to mold me into the man I am.

PAGE 6

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 9 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 11 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................ ................................ ........................... 12 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 15 S tatement of the Problem ................................ ................................ ....................... 17 Purpose ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 18 Objectives ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 18 Significance of the Study ................................ ................................ ........................ 19 Definition of Terms ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 20 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 20 Chapter S ummary ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 21 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ................................ ................................ .................... 23 Theoretical Framework ................................ ................................ ........................... 23 Sel f Determination Theory ................................ ................................ ................ 23 Formal SDT mini theories ................................ ................................ ................. 24 Constructs of SDT ................................ ................................ ............................ 30 Servant Leadership ................................ ................................ .......................... 31 Conceptual Model ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 35 Student Development ................................ ................................ ............................. 36 History of Student Development ................................ ................................ ....... 36 Importance of Student Development ................................ ................................ 37 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 38 3 METHODOLOGY ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 40 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 40 Research Design ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 40 Population ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 41 Instrumentation ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 43 Data Collection ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 47 Data Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 48 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 48

PAGE 7

7 4 RESULTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 50 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 50 Demographics of Respondents ................................ ................................ ............... 51 Objective One: Describe the motivational factors of student leaders and non leaders in undergradua te students in CALS at UF who are involved in collegiate agricultural organizations: ................................ ............................. 56 Relatedness ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 56 Competence ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 57 Autonomy ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 58 Objective Two: Describe the ability to lead of both leaders and non leaders by members of collegiate agricultural organizations : ................................ ..... 58 Altruistic calling ................................ ................................ ................................ 59 Emotional Healing ................................ ................................ ............................ 60 Wisdom ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 60 Persuasive Mapping ................................ ................................ ......................... 61 Organizational stewardship ................................ ................................ .............. 61 Objective Three: C ompare differences in motivational factors in leaders and non leader members of collegiate agricultural organizations ............................... 62 Objective Four: ................................ ................................ ................................ 65 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 71 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ ....................... 72 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 72 Purpose and Objectives ................................ ................................ ................... 72 Methodology ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 73 Summary of Findings ................................ ................................ .............................. 73 Objective 1: Describe the motivational leadership factors of student leaders and non leaders in undergraduate students in CALS at UF who are involved in collegiate agricultural organizations ................................ ............ 73 Objective 2: Describe the ability to lead of both leaders and non leaders by members of collegiate agricultural organizations ................................ .......... 74 Objective 3: Compare differences in motivational factors of leaders and non leader members of collegiate agricultural organizations ........................ 75 Objective 4: Examine the relationship between desire to lead and demographic characteristics ................................ ................................ .......... 76 Conclusions ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 77 Objective 1 Describe the motivational leadership factors of student leaders and non leaders in undergraduate students in CA LS at UF who are involved in collegiate agricultural organizations: ................................ ........... 77 Objective 2 Describe the ability to lead of both leaders and non leaders by members of collegiate agricultural organizati ons: ................................ ......... 77 Objective 3 Compare differences in motivational factors in leaders and non leader members of collegiate agricultural organizations: .............................. 77 Objective 4 Examine the relationship between desire to lead and demographic characteristics: ................................ ................................ ......... 78

PAGE 8

8 Discussion and Implications ................................ ................................ .................... 78 National Research Agenda ................................ ................................ ..................... 82 Recommendations ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 83 Recommendations for Practice ................................ ................................ ........ 83 Recommendations for Research ................................ ................................ ...... 84 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 86 APPENDIX A LIST OF ALL COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL AND LIFE SCIENCES STUDENT ORGANIZATIONS ................................ ................................ ................ 87 B CONSTRUCT DEFINITIONS ................................ ................................ .................. 90 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................... 92 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ ............................ 99

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4 1 Leader vs. Non leader in Undergraduate Student Organizations ........................... 52 4 2 Participants by Classification ................................ ................................ ................. 53 4 3 Participants by Age ................................ ................................ ................................ 54 4 4 Par ticipants by Gender ................................ ................................ ........................... 54 4 5 Participants by Transfer vs. Non transfer Students ................................ ................ 54 4 6 Participants by Grade Point Average ................................ ................................ ..... 55 4 7 Ethnicity of Participants ................................ ................................ .......................... 55 4 8 Participants by Major ................................ ................................ .............................. 56 4 8 Level of Relatedness of Leaders and Non leaders ................................ ................ 57 4 9 Level of Competence of Leaders and Non leaders ................................ ................ 58 4 10 Level of Auto nomy of Leaders and Non leaders ................................ .................. 58 4 14 Level of Altruistic Calling of Leaders and Non leaders ................................ ......... 59 4 12 Level of Emotional Heal ing of Leaders and Non leaders ................................ ..... 60 4 13 Level of Wisdom of Leaders and Non leaders ................................ ..................... 60 4 14 Level of Persuasive Mapping of Leade rs and Non leaders ................................ .. 61 4 15 Level of Organizational Stewardship of Leaders and Non leaders ...................... 62 4 16 Independent Samples t test fo r Autonomy ................................ ............................ 62 4 17 Independent Samples t test for Competence ................................ ....................... 63 4 18 Independent Samples t test for Relatedness ................................ ....................... 63 4 19 Independent Samples t test for Altruistic Calling ................................ .................. 63 4 20 Independent Samples t test for Emotional Healing ................................ .............. 64 4 21 Independent Samples t test for Wisdom ................................ .............................. 64 4 22 Independent Samples t test for Persuasive Mapping ................................ ........... 64

PAGE 10

10 4 23 Independent Samples t test for Organizational Stewardship ............................... 65 4 24 Relationship Between Desire, Ability To Lead, and Demographic Characteristics ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 68 4 25 Demographic Characteristics ................................ ................................ .............. 69 4 26 Relationship Between Non Desire and Ability To Lead, and Demographic Characteristics ................................ ................................ .............. 70

PAGE 11

11 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2 1 Acceptance of a leadership role conceptual model. ................................ ........... 35 2 1 Acceptance of a leadership role conceptual model. Error! Bookma rk not defined.

PAGE 12

12 LIST OF ABBREVIATION S CALS College of Agricultural and Life Sciences DTDM Dillman Tailored Design Method SDT Self Determination The ory

PAGE 13

13 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Thesis LEADERSHIP MOTIVATIO NAL FACTORS OF STUDENTS IN AGRICULT URAL COLLEGIATE ORGANIZAT IONS By Micah David Scanga May 2011 Chair: Hannah Carter Major: Agricultural Education and Communication The four years spent in college are one of the most important developmental time periods for leader s in the agricultural industry. This research measures the leadership motivational factors of students in colligate organizations in colleges of agriculture. This study will aid in motivating students to seek out and accept leadership roles. The theoretical frameworks used in this study were Self determination Theory and Servant Leadership Theory. The population of this of all undergraduates in student organizations in the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences (CALS) at the University of Florida (UF) for the fall of 2010 semester Participants were administered a researcher designed face to face survey. Eight constructs were measured during this study. The three constructs associated with Self determination Theory were autonomy, competence, and relatednes s. The five constructs associated with Servant Leadership were altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship. The study found that o f the three constructs measured under Self determination Theory relate dness was the only construct that was statistically significant with

PAGE 14

14 distinguishing leaders versus non leaders. Furthermore, the study found that of the five constructs measured under Servant Leadership, a ltruistic calling and organizational stewardship we re the two constructs of servant leadership that had statistically significant differences between leaders and non leaders. The study found that of the t hree constructs measured under Self determination Theory, relatedness was the only construct that was statistically significant with distinguishing leaders versus non leaders in collegiate agricultural organizations Furthermore, the study found that of the five constructs measured under Servant Leadership, altruistic calling and organizational stewardship were the two constructs of servant leadership that had statistically significant differences between leaders and non leaders. These results indicate the greater connection an individual has between members of their organizations the more likely they are to be motivated to take leadership positions. The results also indicate leaders possess higher levels of altruistic calling and organizational stewardship.

PAGE 15

15 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION creating an increased demand on the skills of college graduates In addition to these demands, globalization and changing demographics have generated a new level of applied skil ls graduates must possess in order to succeed (Schumacher & Swan, 1993). In conjunction with these shifting trends, technology and access to information have grown exponentially in the past two decades and continue to expand. Industry standards continue to place many workplace environments under pressure incorporating new accountability standards for new workers in both private sector and governmental realms (Jorion, 2000). Trends like these influence the demand for college graduates to possess not only tec hnical knowledge but also an ability to display analytical, communication, group work and leadership skills ( Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2002). The success of the agriculture industry depends on colleges of agriculture graduates to be competent with skills employers are seeking (Kaufman, 2007). Colleges of agriculture prepare graduates through various venues, including classroom instruction, leadership development experiences, and technical skills training. More specifically, college s of agriculture at land grant universities have the potential to supply graduates with leadership skills for the agricul tural workforce (von Stein, 2008 ). Graduates must have an increased number of skills to deal with the complexities of the agricultural industry (Birkenholz & Schumacher, 1994) Among other skills, including technical expertise, graduates must possess a greater understanding and

PAGE 16

16 ability to demonstrate leadership skills (Andelt, Barrett, & Bosshamer, 1997; Graham, 2001) According to Casner Lotto (2006) one quarter of four year college graduates entering the workforce are deficient in leadership skills. Graduates need profici ency in leadership skills in order to have a successful impact in agriculture ( Kaufman, 2007; Suvedi & Heyboer, 2004) The more graduates that possess leadership skills, the greater impact co lleges of agriculture will have on the agricultural industry. One response to the greater demand for leadership skills in students is a focus on creating a greater amount of student leader development opportunities in higher education, more precisely, in colleges of agriculture (Estevez, 2007; von Stein, 2008) Colleges of agriculture strive to advance students through academic programs and student development experiences. Those s tudents who are motivated to become civically engaged to serve in collegiate leadership organizations show the greatest amount of personal and professional development ( Foubert & Grainger, 2006) Numerous scholar s have suggested that student leadership experiences as an undergraduate are crucial for the development of leadership and other skills needed later in life (Astin, 1977, 1993; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005; Sommers, 1991) In fact, the greatest student development of skills including leadership occurs through student involvement in student organizations (Astin, 1993; Ewing, Bruce, & Ricketts, 2009) Intuitively, involvement in student organizations provides a platform for students to network, build confidence, and builds their skills. Due to the nature of stud ent organizations, student involvement in organizations as members or leaders occurs in a servant leadership role. Servant leadership, a term devised by Greenleaf (2002), is a leader who desires to serve first, and then lead. This

PAGE 17

17 leadership theory has dev eloped over the past four decades and has been used to measure leadership skills. It is appropriate to use servant leadership to assess leadership levels in colleges of agriculture because students are serving the organizations by volunteering for leadersh ip positions. The College of Agricultural and Life Sciences (CALS) at the University of Florida opportunities (von Stein, 2008; Estevez, 2007) Enrichment opportunities include participation in student organizations, developmental seminars, and leadership development programs ( Agricultural and Life Sciences College Council, 2009). Providing opportuni ties for student leadership development aligns with the goal of colleges of agriculture to serve students through development opportunities outside the classroom (Love & Yoder, 1989) CALS has 32 undergraduate stude nt organizations registered with the Agricultural and Life Sciences College Council (ALSCC), which acts as an umbrella organization and liaison to the UF student government ( Agricultural and Life Sciences College Council 2009) Statement of the Problem The agriculture industry needs competent graduates that possess leadership skills. Graduates who are more affluent in leadership skills have a greater chance of 2007). Furthermore, colleges of agriculture provide opportunities for students to develop leadership skill sets (Andelt, Barret, & Bosshamer, 1997). Students enrolled in colleges of agriculture have the most potential for leadership development by beco ming involved in student organizations during their four years in

PAGE 18

18 college (Astin, 1977; Astin, 1993; Birkenholz & Schumacher, 1994) In addition, invol vement in collegiate agricultural organizations contributes to the developme nt of leadership skills (Estevez 2007 ). Although the importance of student involvement and development has been stated, there is still a gap in the research that clearly identif ied why students get involved (Foubert & Grainger, 2006) Minimal research has been conducted in how colleges of agriculture faculty and staff can motivate students to seek out and accept leadership roles within c olleges of agriculture. Purpose The purpose of this study is to discover the motivating factors of students in the CALS at the UF to seek or accept leadership roles in student organizations. Objectives This research will address the following objectives : 1. Describe the motivational leadership factors of student leaders and non leaders in undergraduate students in CALS at UF who are involved in collegiate agricultural organizations 2. Describe the ability to lead of both leaders and non leaders by members of c ollegiate agricultural organizations 3. Compare differences in motivational factors in leaders and non leader members of collegiate agricultural organizations 4. Examine the relationship between desire to lead and demographic characteristics

PAGE 19

19 Significance of the Study This study makes a contribution to the field of undergraduate student leadership development by increasing the knowledge of collegiate leadership development. The study identified factors that explain the motivation of members in collegiate organiza tions to take on leadership roles. Understanding what motivates students to participate in leadership roles will give faculty and staff a better understanding of how to serve and motivate students to take leadership positions. n the intricacies and possible direction of the relationship between student involvement in organizations and student leadership and develop more effective leadership pro grams for undergraduate students and help increase leadership capacity within these organizations. The information would also be beneficial for student organizations that have had a history of limited leadership ing leaders with unique opportunities to (Isaac, Zerbe, & Pitt, 2001, p.1) Furthermore, research on studen t leadership provides a better understanding of how to motivate students who have not been leaders to take more leadership roles in the future. This will create more student leaders, which will impact the agricultural industry. This research coincides with the National Research Agenda for Agricultural Education and Communication (Osborne, n.d.). This study provided advancement in the following areas under the Agricultural Education in University and Postsecondary Settings:

PAGE 20

20 s for the future workforce in the agricultural Overall, this research is consistent with the national agen da by helping the sustainability and succession of academic agricultural leadership programs (Osborne, n.d.) Definition of Terms 1. Servant Leadership behavior that exceeds self desire to serve the needs of ot hers (Greenleaf, 1977) 2. Student Leaders members of a collegiate organization who hold positions in their respective organizations or have been identified as leaders by their advisors 3. Active Member an individu al who is involved in the workings of the organization and has a stake in the activities that are being conducted 4. CALS student organization a CALS club/organization registered with the Agricultural and Life Sciences College Council 5. Motivation in this s (Deci & Ryan, 1985) and measured as a score on Self Determination scale 6. Motivational Factor a factor that drives an individual to move the mselves or others to act (Deci & Ryan, 1985) Limitations In an attempt increase the credibility of this research, the following are acknowledged as limitations:

PAGE 21

21 1. Generalizability of the study to other colleges of agriculture in different universities is limited. The research methodology used in this study only allows the results to be generalized to CALS students. 2. Sampling errors will occur because the complete population could not be surveyed (Agresti & Finlay, 2009) The use of the names provided by the college of agriculture may not all be current or updated with actual club officers and leaders. 3. Coverage error may occur because some of the leaders assessed in CALS student organizations do not include those who do not have access to their e mail accounts or are traveling abroad and may not be able to take the survey. Chapter Summary Colleges of agriculture have an opportunity to make a difference in the agricultural indust have the chance to make a difference in communities through serving in leadership roles and being civically engaged. Student leadership skills are grown through involvement in student organizations. In addition, student organizations are the best place for students to potentially hold a leadership role and develop leadership skills. However, full understanding of what factors motivate students to take on leadership experience s was unknown. These motivational factors are important to understand so the faculty and staff can better motivate students to accept leadership positions.

PAGE 22

22 The purpose of this study was to discover what motivates students to take leadership positions in st udent organizations in CALS at UF. For organizations in CALS that are lacking in providing leadership developmental experiences for undergraduate students, understanding motivational factors will help facilitate more developmental experiences in the future

PAGE 23

23 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE The previous chapter illustrated the importance of discovering the motivating factors of leaders in collegiate agricultural organizations. This study will fill a gap in the research of what motivates students to seek out a nd accept leadership roles. Understanding these motivators will help faculty and staff better able to serve the needs of students, encourage more students to seek out and accept leadership roles, and also stimulate more effective leadership in student orga nizations. This chapter examines background information and presents a review of literature on two theories, self determination theory (SDT) and servant leadership that will be combined into a framework utilized for this study. The conceptual model for t his study decision to accept a leadership role. The purpose of this study was to understand the motivating factors that lead CALS students to accept leadership roles. The fin dings will allow UF faculty and staff to develop better student leadership programs and develop stronger student leaders. Theoretical Framework Self Determination Theory The first of the two directing theories for this research is Self Determination Theory It is a meta theory consisting of five motivational theories: cognitive evaluation theory, organismic integration theory, causality orientations theory, basic psychological needs theory, and goal contents theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2002). These five theo ries provide the theoretical groundwork for the three main components of Self Determination Theory, which are relatedness, competence, and autonomy. Combined, these three

PAGE 24

24 components lead to sustainable motivation. Sustainable motivation is enduring motivat ion that stems from within an individual (Stone, Deci, and Ryan, 2009). It is appropriate to use a theoretical framework that incorporates sustainable motivation because the researcher is looking at behavior that is exhibited over the course of four years. Formal SDT mini theories Cognitive evaluation theory (CET). The first meta theory of self development theory was developed over the past half century. CET stemmed from Richard De Personal Causation: The internal affective de terminants of behavior motivations, establishing a separate and distinct difference between motivation emerging from within an individual and motivation stemming from an external force. De of causality shifted from internal to external. For example, when an external motivator was added to a task originally motivated from within, the individual assigned the task felt lower motivation to accomplish the work. Deci (1999 ) demonstrated this effect in an experiment with a group of college students. In the study, two groups of students were timed while working on puzzles during two different sessions. In the f irst session, the two groups worked on the puzzles for a set amount of time. In the second session, the control group continued working on the puzzles without external motivators. However, during the second session, students in the experimental group were offered $1 for each puzzle they completed. After the sessions, both groups were given the option to continue working on the puzzles in a third session. Students in the experimental group chose not to continue working on the

PAGE 25

25 puzzles, while students in the c ontrol group opted to continue their work with the puzzles. Results indicate that the addition of an external motivator monetary compensation resulted in decreased intrinsic motivation and autonomy for students in the experimental group. This example i llustrates external motivators, such as paying a college student to complete a task, might have negative effects on their intrinsic motivation. Deci and Ryan (1985) further built upon CET by stating that certain types of rewards lower intrinsic motivatio n because external rewards lower self determination. Autonomy is a key aspect of motivation and when an individual perceives little or less autonomy, personal motivation was greatly reduced (Deci, 1980). Other studies, including Lepper and Greene (1975), e examining other factors, conducting experiments with conditions that included surveillance on participants and external rewards. During this work the effects on intrinsic motivation where measured. To expand CET further Anderson, Manoogian, and Rezick (1976) studied the ways in which individuals reacted to positive reinforcement. Research showed that intrinsic motivation increased when individuals received an outside stimulus that n a task. When pre school aged children were given affirmative feedback when completing a task, their intrinsic motivation was increased (Anderson, Manoogian, & Rezick, 1976). CET plays an important role in Self addr essing the effects of social contexts on intrinsic motivation, or how factors such as

PAGE 26

26 rewards, interpersonal controls, and ego involvement impact intrinsic motivation and Organismic integration theory (OIT) SDT is grounded in the belief that humans are organisms that strive for development and growth, internalization of our behaviors and those behaviors become integrated within our sense of self (Deci & motivation in its various forms, cannot be measured simply by examining motivators o r actions independently, rather these actions must be measured in a more holistic fashion (Deci & Ryan, 2002). The Metaphysics, in which he suggests that the whole is more tha n the sum of its parts. Angyal (1965) expanded the idea of holism to integrate autonomy and homonymy the combination of holistic self regulation and integration. This integration laid an important base for the development of OIT and SDT. Deci and Ryan (2 002) expressed that OIT involves complementary functioning of ideas autonomy and homonymy a connection between extrinsic motivators and an internal determination. Examining the extrinsic motivators of individuals in this organismic view, Deci and Ryan (1985) explored the importance of shifting from extrinsic factors, which may the individual to be the locus of control. This control, in accordance with SDT, en hances the motivation of an individual in completing a task. This process is known as internalization. Deci and Ryan (1985) divided the concept of internalization into a

PAGE 27

27 classification of four subtypes. These four subtypes are on a continuum of internaliza tion: external regulation, introjections, identification, and integration. Phelan (2008) suggested that internalization could range from controlled to autonomous within the four extrinsic motivation subtypes. However, OIT is not a stage theory in which an individual progresses from one subtype to the next, but rather the subtypes occur concurrently. External regulation blends the concepts of self regulation and anticipation (Deci & Ryan, 1985). An individual will self regulate behavior in anticipation of c onsequence or reinforcement in connection to an action. This subtype was the least self determining, and according to Deci and Ryan (2002), was usually in accordance with an external force or social pressure. Introjection regulation refers to a behavior that has been internalized to a certain extent but not accepted by oneself. These behaviors coincide with avoidance, guilt, or 2002). Individuals who conduct behaviors in accordance with introjection motivation are doing so to avoid lowering self worth (Phelan, 2008). determined form of extrinsic motivation, for it involves a conscious valuing of a The final subtype, with the greatest amount of self determination, is integrated regulation. Integra ted regulation occurs when individuals are motivated by an extrinsic

PAGE 28

28 motivator, and the motivator is in sync with their previously established values, goals, and needs (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2002). The internalization process is facilitated by a sense of re latedness (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Extrinsic motivators are more likely to be internalized if the individual feels socially related to others in the environment (Deci, 1985). Social adopting through relatedness to others in the environment is a supported perce ption of internalization (Self Determination Theory, 2008). Causality orientations theory (COT). Determination Theory, 20 08). COT is broken into three types of causality orientations: autonomy, control, and impersonal or amotivated. Deci & Ryan (1985) stated that every individual demonstrates a dominant orientation. The first of these types is autonomy orientation. Autonomy orientation is the ability to make a choice uninfluenced by reinforcements or consequences. Individuals who fall into the autonomy orientation seek out environments that allow them to have choice over their own decisions (Deci & Ryan, 1985). The second t ype of causality orientation is the control oriented individual persons who favor environments in which they would feel pressure to act accordingly (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Individuals who are control oriented focus on rewards, gains, and approval Deter of causality (Phelan, 2008). Finally, the third type of COT is impersonal or amotivated orientation. Amotivation 008). Individuals who,

PAGE 29

29 for the most part, fall within this category perceive that they have very little effect on the outcome of situations. Feeling that the outcome is out of their hands, individuals with impersonal or amotivated orientation perceives th at it does not matter what their intentions may be and, therefore, do little to regulate their behavior (Deci & Ryan, 1985). As a result, motivation is all but extinguished, and this results in amotivation. This orientation leads to high anxiety and often can lead individuals to behave with little or no intention, learning the behavior to happen accidentally or not at all (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Basic psychological needs theory (BPNT). Fundamentally, BPNT is based off the assumption that all people have basi c intrinsic and extrinsic needs to thrive. BPNT as related to SDT focuses on three basic psychological aspects of needs theory. These three components are competence, relatedness, and autonomy. According to SDT, (Deci & Ryan, 2002). According to BPNT, environments that support the health and prosperity of these three components will foster the psychological development and motivation of the individual (Self Determination Th eory, 2008). Competence guides people to seek out new challenges and through these challenges they experience development (Phelan, 2008). An individual who experiences a high level of competence finds confidence in him or herself, as a result, will be eff ective in action (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Relatedness has a two fold association; connected to interpersonal feelings of

PAGE 30

3 0 connection, but also to social connections. Individuals have an innate sense to want to be connected to other people (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Autonomy is the perception that oneself is the source of his or her own actions (de Cha rms, 1968; Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2002). Deci & Ryan (2002) clarified how autonomy relates to SDT by arguing that autonomy is not freedom or independence, but the term c hoice is meant as a motivational concept (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Goal contents theory (GCT). GCT is the fifth theory, and is the newest addition extrinsic goals and their impac Determination T has been researched in new settings that have expanded the application: psychological health and well being, but most recently it has been related to learning, achieveme Lens, & Deci, 2006, p. 10) Constructs of SDT Relatedness. Using empirical processes, Deci and Ryan (2000) found that being s motivation levels. Relatedness is a construct in this study examining how connected members feel to their peers.

PAGE 31

31 Competence. Deci and Ryan (2000) found that optimal motivation levels and competence in abilities are correlated. This construct was appropr iate to use in this research to measure how competent individuals in organizations feel in their leadership abilities. Autonomy. and innate psychological needs that are the basis for their self & Ryan, 2000, p. 68). Autonomy in this study will measure the levels of self direction from student leaders. Servant Leadership In collegiate student affairs, leadership was difficult to narrow down from a broad topic into a singl e precise definition. Ricketts (2005) believed that leadership was particularly challenging to conceptualize because the definition of leadership is complex. Servant leaders are believed to possess the knowledge and experience needed to facilitate organiza tional choices and change ( Bierly, Kessler, & Christensen 2000). Students who hold a leadership position in an organization are servant leaders to their organization. Robert Greenleaf established the concept of servant leadership in 1977, believing that: The servant leader is servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. The best test is: do those served grow as persons; do they, while being served, become heal thier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? (Greenleaf and Spears, 1998, p. 1). Over the past four decades servant leadership has been examined and tial work laid the

PAGE 32

32 foundation for researchers interested in investigating how true leaders can maximize their potential in a servant role in institutions (Barbuto Jr. & Wheeler, 2006). Spears (1995) posits servant leaders serve those around them through fo resight, conceptualization, stewardship, and community building. Barbuto and Wheeler (2006) refined previous work in servant leadership into five factors that appear conceptually and empirically distinct: altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, pe rsuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship. These five factors were the second theoretical framework used in this research. Altruistic calling dimensional construct of servant leadership stemmed from G ) original essay, The Servant as Leader rooted desire to and Locke (2002) discussed a number of impo rtant virtues which leaders have that integrity, independence, productiveness, justice, and pride. These character traits describe the self sacrificing aspects of a leade establish an altruistic calling. Self sacrificing leadership has been shown to have positive behavioral effects between followers and leaders of an organization (Choi & Mai Dalton, 1998). Kanugo and Conger (1993) suggested altruism was key to success of the individual leadership within an organization. Developing an altruistic calling, however, does not occur for every leader because it develops out of intrinsic motivating factors. Fry (2003) stated that through a reflective process, leaders who operated based on a spiritual or internal sense of

PAGE 33

33 motivation altruistic motives were better suited to meet follower needs. Accordingly, Bass (2000) posited that the most likely leader to embrace altruistic objectives was the servant leader. Emotional healing Emotional healing, the second factor of Barbuto and commitment to and skill in fostering spiritual recovery from hardship or traum & Wheeler, 2006, p. 318). One of the most powerful tools for developing effective leadership is emotional healing (Emmerich, 2001). Accordingly, Weymes (2002) stated that one of the most crucial aspects of leadership is developing emotional rel ationships with followers. Successful leaders create forums for followers to voice their concerns and views (Emmerich, 2001). A large part of emotional healing is listening. Greenleaf (1970) suggested that listening was the first action a leader should t ake in any situation. Listening can foster feeling of forgiveness and humility, both of which are important for the healing process (Fry, 2003). Wisdom rbuto & Wheeler, 2006, p. 318 319). The combination of awareness of surroundings and anticipation of consequence results in leaders who are better in tune with what is taking place in the environment around them (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006; Sternberg, 2003). Bierly, Kessler, and Christensen (2000) stated that leaders who have a high level of wisdom have the ability to be observant in any environment. One facet of wisdom is emotional intelligence, which includes having es. Individuals who possess higher levels of

PAGE 34

34 emotional intelligence showed better leadership potential (Sosik & Megerian, 1999; Barling, Slater, & Kelloway, 2000). Persuasive mapping dimensional construct, r, 2006, p. 319). Mental models have been used in self managed teams and have been shown to produce more positive outcomes in an organization (Druskat & Pescosolido, 2002). Spears (1995) stated a good leader must use foresight to anticipate future even ts. With foresight the leader may establish a vision. A leader must align followers to the vision of the organization to increase performance (Awamleh & Gardner, 1999). A large part of persuasive mapping is visioning. Visioning skills have been linked to l eadership performance (Tower, 2003). Organizational stewardship extent that leaders prepare an organization to make a positive contribution to society arbuto & Wheeler, 2006, p. 319). and is important for a leader to stand for this legacy (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006 ). Leaders have a responsibility to guide their organizat ions as responsible stewards, as

PAGE 35

35 legacy, according to Giltmier (1990), is to be cognizant of the externalities of his or her organization. Conceptual Model A conceptual m odel (Figure 2 1) was created by the researcher to demonstrate the relationships between SDT, servant leadership, and the developmental outcomes related to seeking out and accepting a leadership role. This conceptual model shows the cyclical stages and inf luences that affect the acceptance of a leadership role. Figure 2 1 Acceptance of a leadership role conceptual model First, the model shows the five major components of Self Determination Theory on the left side. As discussed in this chapter, cognitive evaluation, organismic integration, casual orientation, basic psychological needs, and goal contents are the five individual who is motivated by these five mini theories will be more motivated to take a leadership position and receive the benefits from holding that position including personal development through involvement and enhanced motivation. As seen in the

PAGE 36

36 model, higher levels of motivation are likely to influence the student to accept additional leadership roles. The second part of the model was the integration of servant leadership. Barbuto and Wheeler (2006) established a framework using servant leadership that includes five factors. These five factors listed on th e right side of the conceptual model are: altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship. An individual who demonstrates proficiency in these five areas is more inclined to accept a leadership role. The ac ceptance of the leadership position leads to development of leadership skills. Subsequently, the development of leadership skills is likely to influence the student to accept additional leadership roles. Student Development History of Student Development The study of post secondary student development has origins in psychology. At the turn of the last century, psychological theorists started to examine behavior in terms of human psychological development. During the 1920s, the vocational guidance movemen t began. Frank Parsons, known as the father of vocational guidance, DiBrito, 1998). This progression led to vocational placement being one of the main purposes in student devel opment over the next half century (Evans, Forney, & Guido DiBrito, 1998). The next contributing movement to student development came in 1937 from the American Council on Education (ACE). The ACE released a document, as the first time that educators viewed student development as assisting a student to become a whole person (Evans, Forney, & Guido DiBrito, 1998).

PAGE 37

37 Between the 1960s and the 1970s three major theories developed. First, in 1968, William Perry introduced a n intellectual developmental theory within student affairs. Then Arthur Chickering proposed questions in relation to identity and development in became prevalent in student aff airs (Evans, Forney, Guido, Renn, & Patton, 2010). In the 1970s, during turbulent social times, student development in post secondary education reached another milestone and began to grow in awareness and theory base. Student affairs were reinvented, as g roups such as the Council of Student Personnel Association (COSPA) and the Hazen Foundation re envisioned student affairs to encompass human development (Evans, Forney, Guido DiBrito, 1998). A sudden increase of development theories began to appear in li terature in the late 1990s and early 21 st century. The American College Personnel Association (ACPA) Education Project (Evans, et al., 1998). The project found that student a ffairs education learning experiences, reorganizing student affairs offices and functions, being accountable by conducting l., 2010, p.12). Emphases on cross cultural and cognitive developmental theories have appeared, resulting in examination of new dimensions of student development (Evans et al., 2010). Importance of Student Development The academic experience should be ho listic, accentuated by development most critical to his or her development (Astin, 1993, 1985). In those four years, students

PAGE 38

38 have the opportunity to get involved in colleg iate organizations that supplement their learning experiences. These include student government, departmental organizations, organizations. The more a student is involved during t heir collegiate career, the greater their leadership development is enhanced (Cooper, Healy, & Simpson, 1994). Student involvement results not only in leadership development, but personal, social, professional, and academic d evelopment, as well (Astin, 19 93 ). Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) posited student involvement was the combination of college experiences and interconnectedness of activities that students participate in that result in their development. Student development cannot be viewed as a gener al experience, but rather, must examined on an individual case basis. Sanford (1962) stated that successful student development was not measured in comparing students, but rather as an individual. Summary Self Determination Theory (SDT), developed by Dec i and Ryan (1985), and servant leadership, developed by Greenleaf (1977), has been used as the guiding theories of research in servant leadership. These two theories provided the basis in this study for the theoretical framework that examines what motivate s students to accept leadership roles. SDT examines how individuals are motivated intrinsically and extrinsically with the three main concepts from this theory which influence motivation being autonomy, relatedness, and competence (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999) Servant leadership is a leadership theory that provided the basis in this study for defining leadership in

PAGE 39

39 collegiate organizations within colleges of agriculture. The five factors used in this study on servan t leadership were: altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational leadership (Barbuto Jr. & Wheeler, 2006) Student development spawned from research at the turn of the twentieth century in the field of psychology. Over the past century, student development went from vocational placement to holistic development of students. Previous research conducted showed that student involvement develops students in many facets inclu ding development in leadership skills (Astin, 1977) These leadership skills were crucial for the success of graduates in the agricultural industry.

PAGE 40

40 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY Introduction Chapter one explained th e importance of colleges of agriculture producing graduates with competence in subject matter and leadership. Chapter one also established the importance of college students becoming engaged in and involved in collegiate organizations. Chapter two present ed a discussion on the theoretical and conceptual frameworks utilized in this study. SDT and servant leadership were the foundational theories used in the development of the conceptual model for this study. A review of literature on SDT and servant leaders hip was also conducted. Involvement in organizations has been shown to promote student development. This chapter describes the methods exercised in this study, including the research design, population, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis p rocedures. Research Design This study utilized a quantitative, non experimental, causal comparative survey research design. A quantitative study is defined by McMillan & Schmacher (2010) as a research design that measures and describes phenomena. A non exp erimental Schmacher, 2010, p. 22). A causal comparative design was used because this study investigated the relationship of two variables. Operating through a postpositivis m

PAGE 41

41 contextual factors, and use of multiple theories within which research findings are The researcher took every effort to limit the sources of errors in this study. Potential types of error include measurement error, response bias, Type I and II sampling errors, and nonresponse bias. According to Dillman, Smyth, and Christian (2009), measurement error occurs when a respon bias stems from poorly worded questions or confusing questions that may cause the participant to give an incorrect response (Agresti & Finaly, 2009). The researcher followed Dillman Tailored Design Method (DTDM) in buil ding a sound questionnaire to avoid response bias. The researcher also took every effort to limit nonresponse error. Agresti and Finlay (2009) stated that nonresponse error appears when participants cannot be reached or refuse to participate. The researche r contacted members of the population in accordance to the DTDM reduce nonresponse error from the population. Type I statistical error occurs when the null hypothesis is rejected and it should not have been. Type ll error occurs when the null hypothesis sh ould have been rejected and was not. Another step the researcher took in designing the research instrument was getting access to an expert in survey design to review the survey for graphical, structural, and flow aspects. Population The population for t his study consisted of all undergraduates in student organizations in the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences (CALS) at the University of Florida (UF) for the fall of 2010 semester. In this study a student organization was defined as an organization registered with the Agricultural and Life Sciences College Council (ALSCC) or recognized as affiliated with CALS. There are 60 student

PAGE 42

42 organizations are associated with CALS, 32 of those registered with the ALSCC (C. Carr, personal communication, October 1 2, 2010). Five student organizations, Animal Sciences Graduate Student Association, Masters of Agribusiness Student Organization, Agricultural Education and Communication Graduate Student Association, School of Natural Resources and Environmental Council, and the Statewide Student Organization were eliminated because they did not fall under the classification of undergraduate student organizations. The organizations were chosen for the study because of the common structure and attributes. Each was required to have a constitution, officers, and an advisor. This provided consistency across the population. A complete list of organizations and officers of these student organizations was obtained from the CALS 10). A convenience sample was taken from the population (see appendix A for a Schumacher, 2010, p. 137). The sample was student organizations registered with ALSCC. Student organizations registered with ALSCC and met qualifications of this research are listed below: Agricultural and Life Sciences College Council Agricultural Communicators and Leaders of Tomorrow Agricultural Economics Club Agronomy/ Soils Club Alpha Zeta The Campus Kitchens Project

PAGE 43

43 Collegiate 4 H Collegiate Farm Bureau Collegiate FFA/Agricultural Education and Communication Society Dairy Science Entomology Environmental Hor ticulture Ethnoecology Society Equestrian Club Family, Youth, and Community Sciences Forestry Club Gator Citrus Gator Collegiate Cattlewomen's Association Marine Biology Microbiology and Cell Sciences Student Organization Minorities in Agriculture Natural Resources and Related Sciences (MANRRS) Organic and Sustainable Agriculture Club Pre Veterinary Medicine Club Sigma Alpha Society for Viral Studies Wetlands Club Wildlife Society Instrumentation The researcher found no single, established instrument tha t measured the factors which motivate undergraduates in student organizations to seek out and accept

PAGE 44

44 leadership positions. The researcher adapted two existing instruments and followed ions and flowed to maximize participant response rate. This study utilized a 52 item questionnaire to examine the research objectives. The questionnaire focused on three sections: servant leadership, self determination, and demographics of the population. The researcher adapted an existing instru m ent s to measure student levels of motivation. The Basic Need Satisfaction at Work Scale (BNSWS) measures an Deci and Ryan (2000). The researcher ad apted the questionnaire to pertain to student organizations. This instrument was used in the following studies: Deci, Ryan, Gagn, Leone, Usunov, & Kornazheva, 2001; Ilardi, Leone, Kasser, & Ryan, 1993; Kasser, Davey, & Ryan, 1992. The r esearcher also utilized an existing instrument to measure student levels of servant leadership. The Servant Leadership Questionnaire (SLQ) was developed by Barbuto and Wheeler (2006 ) to measure levels of altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persu asive mapping, and organizational stewardship. This instrument has been utilized in the following stu dies: Dannhauser & Boshoff, 2006 ( = .981) ; Liden, Wayne, Zhao, & Henderson, 2008 measured the emotional healing construct ( = .89) ; Sendjaya, Sarros, & Santora, 2008. The instrument was developed from Spears (1995) (1970) original essay, where Spears developed ten attributes of the servant leader. The questionnaire began with an informed consent form requesting the participants to voluntarily participate. A few preliminary questions were asked to

PAGE 45

45 determine whether or not the participant held an office in the organi zation. Students were instructed to take the survey through the experience with the organization they were a member. Cronbach alphas reported on constructs in this section are from Scale Development and Construct Clarification of Servant Leadership. Questions 1 44 on the survey instrument were on a likert scale. The first 23 questions measured the five constructs of servant leadership. Questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 on ( = .83). ( = .88). Questions 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 ( = .82) of persuasive mapping ( = .83) organizational stewardship ( = .87) Questions 22 44 measured the levels of competence, relatedness, and autonomy of the participants. Survey questions 24, 27, 31, 34, 37, 40, and 43 measure s Survey questions 26, organization(s). Survey questions 25, 29, 30, 32 35, 39, 41, and 44 measure the The researcher developed questions 45 52 to measure the leadership involvements, academic classification, age, gender, grade point average, ethnicity, transfer students, and major of the participants.

PAGE 46

46 Lastly, the SLQ describes the factors that motivate individuals from a servant leadership prospective (Barbuto & Scholl, 1998). Questions from the SLQ measure the five variables from the servant leadership framew ork. Barbuto and Wheeler (2006) identified five variables : altruistic calling ( = .82) emotional healing ( = .91) wisdom ( = .92) persuasive mapping ( = .87) and organizational stewardship ( = .89). An expert panel composed of academic faculty familiar with this study reviewed the instrument for content and face validity. A ccording to McMillan and Schumacher (2010), face validity is the confidence that items on the questionnaire are relevant to the study. This panel also examined potential construct underrepresentation. Construct ils to capture important aspects of the 174). from the nature of the measurement and int erventions used to the constructs they A proposal to conduct this study was approved by the University of Florida Institutional Review Board: IRB 02 Protocol #2010 U 819. Before the collect ion of data, a pilot study was conducted with one undergraduate student organizations not registered with ALSCC. Alpha Gamma Rho, an agricultural fraternity associated with CALS was used for the pilot study because of the similarities it shared with the sa mpling population. Through this pilot study the response ite ms. Cronbach alpha measured .85

PAGE 47

47 Data Collection The researcher administered the survey instrument face to face during club meetings. This distribution method was preferred over online survey methods due to low response rates by undergraduates (Dommeyer, Baum, Hanna, & Chapman, 2004). This study used the three email contact strategy (Dillman, 2009). In additi on, the researcher also employed face to face, telephone calls, and social media tools to contact and set up survey administration. The first contact with organizations was at the ALSCC meeting on October 12, 2010. The researcher was introduced to the orga nizations in attendance and gave a brief introduction to the research and the topics importance. After this contact, an email sent to officers/advisors on October 13, 2010 contained a brief introduction on the research and a request to set up logistics wit h each organization to administer the instrument. In addition, the first email discussed the importance of participation and the approximate length of the survey. The second email sent to officers and advisors on October 20, 2010 thanked the participants w ho had completed the survey and served as a reminder to those who had not yet completed the survey to reply with the time of the next meeting of their organizations. In between the second and third emails, the researcher contacted officers/advisors of orga nizations that had not yet responded to request participation. A third email sent out on November 2, 2010 individually addressed the officers and advisors who had not yet participated and acknowledged the short amount of time left to complete the survey an d emphasized the importance of their response (Dillman, 2009). The researcher also followed up with each of the 27 organizations individually to set up logistics of meeting times and places.

PAGE 48

48 If no e mail response had been received from officers during the se three contacts, the researcher utilized social media as a final attempt to communicate with these officers. Data Analysis The data collected has been analyzed using descriptive and comparative statistics, using the Statistical Package for the Social S ciences 17.0 (SPSS). Frequencies ( f ), means ( ), standard deviations ( ), and other measures of central tendency were used to describe the motivational leadership factors of student leaders and non leaders, and the desire to lead by both leaders and non le aders. Frequencies are defined as the number of possible values for a variable (Agresti & Finlay, 2009). The mon measures at which to examine data. Agresti and Finlay (2009) define standard deviation measures the variability based on deviations of the data from an average. To satisfy the last objective of the study, to compare the leaders to the non leaders, comp arative statistics were used. Comparative statistics are used in a study where the researcher is examining whether a relationship between two groups exist (McMillian & Schumacher, 2010). When examining the response variables, parameters of the leader group and parameters of the non leader group were compared using t tests. Summary This chapter summarized the methods used to reach the objectives discussed in chapter one. The research design was described as a quantitative, non experimental, descriptive, sur vey research design. The population was identified an organization registered with the ALSCC in which a majority of the members were undergraduates in

PAGE 49

49 the CALS at UF. Next, this studies instrument was adapted from the Servant Leadership Questionnaire and B asic Psychological Needs Scale. A detailed overview of the construction of the researcher developed questionnaire was included. The methods for data collection included employing a three email contact strategy to members of the population. The data has bee n analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences 17.0.

PAGE 50

50 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS Introduction The purpose of this study was to discover the motivating factors that students in the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences (CALS) at the University of Florida (UF) possess to seek out or accept leadership roles in student organizations. Chapter 1 explained the importance of colleges of agriculture producing graduates with competence; in subject matter and leadership, stated the importance of college stu dents becoming involved in collegiate organizations and established this 1. Describe the motivational leadership factors of undergraduate in CALS at UF who are involved in collegiate agricultural organizations 2. Describe the ability to lead of both leaders and non leaders by members of collegiate agricultural organizations 3. Compare differences in motivational factors in leaders and non leader members of collegiate agricultural organizations 4. Examine the relationship between desire to lead and d emographic characteristics Chapter 2 presented a discussion on the theoretical and conceptual frameworks utilized in this study. Self determination theory (SDT) and servant leadership were the foundational theories used in the development of the conceptual model for this study. A review of literature on SDT and servant leadership was also conducted. Also included in this chapter were studies that showed involvement in student organizations led to overall student development.

PAGE 51

51 Chapter 3 described the methods established in this study, including the research design, population, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis procedures. This chapter presents the findings of the study. The chapter begins with a description of the demographics of the respond ents. Following the analysis, this chapter will present the findings of the study for each objective. The population of this study was comprised of all undergraduates that were members of in student organizations in CALS at UF for the fall of 2010 semester Following the procedures established in Chapter 3, a convenience sample was taken of students that were members in student organizations registered with the ALSCC. In accordance to the data collection procedures discussed in Chapter 3, 27 organizations w ere contacted to participate in the study. Of those 27 organizations, 21 were surveyed and data was collected. This accounted for a 78% organizational response rate. In the 27 registered ALSCC organization there are 1,019 members during the fall 2010 semes ter. Of the 1,019 members of student organizations registered with ALSCC, there were 540 respondents. This accounted for a 53% response rate. This response rate was deemed acceptable based on the recommended response rate for a finite population, which is 28.6% (Israel, 2009). Demographics of Respondents The study included seven demographic questions. Respondents listed their positions in their respective organizations and the researcher separated leader from non leader based on whether the respondent was one of the following positions: president, vice president, treasurer, or secretary. Table 4 1 reported whether respondents held leadership roles in their respective organizations. Of those who responded 15.5% were leaders and 83.2% were non leaders.

PAGE 52

52 Tabl e 4 1 Leader vs. Non leader in Undergraduate Student Organizations Leader vs. non leader n Percent Leader 74 15.7 Non leader 397 84.3 Total 471 Note n =47 1 ; Missing=6 of agricultural and life science student. When asked to provide information regarding their classification respondents answered as follows: 45 (10.6%) identified themselves as a 1AG (freshmen), 63 (14.8%) identified themselves as 2AG (sophomores), 145 (34. 1%) identified themselves as 3AG (juniors), 137 (32.2%) identified themselves as 4AG, and 34 (8.2%) identified themselves as other (see Table 4 2).

PAGE 53

53 Table 4 2 Participants by Classification Classification n Percent 1AG 45 10.6 2AG 63 14.8 3AG 145 34.1 4AG 137 32.2 Other 34 8.2 Total 424 Note. n =424; Missing=47 Table 4 respondents, 86.9% ( n =405) of the respondents were between 18 23 ye ars of age, 10.9% ( n =51) of the respondents were between the ages of 24 29. Finally, 2.1% ( n =10) were between the ages of 30 35 years of age.

PAGE 54

54 Table 4 3. Participants by Age Ages n Percent 18 23 24 29 30 35 35+older 405 51 10 0 86.9 10.9 2.1 0 Total 466 Note. n =466; Missing=11 When asked to report gender, participants responded as shown in Table 4 4. Of the respondents, 77.7% ( n =365) were female and 22.1% ( n =104) were male. Table 4 4 Participants by Gender Gender n Pe rcent Female 365 77.7 Male 104 22.1 Total 469 Note. n =469; Missing=7 Participants also identified if they were a transfer student into CALS. Of the respondents, 30.3% ( n =128) were transfer students into the college, while 69.4% ( n =293) w ere non transfer students, as seen in Table 4 5. Table 4 5 Participants by Transfer vs. Non transfer Students Transfer vs. non transfer n Percent Transfer 128 30.3 Non transfer 293 69.4 Total 422 Note. n =422; Missing=55 Participants reported their grade point average (GPA). Of those that responded, 61.6% ( n =260) reported a GPA of 3.5 4.0; 33.1% ( n =140) students a 3.0 3.4 GPA; 4.5% ( n =19) a GPA ranging from 2.5 2.9; and three students responded with a GPA of 2.0 2.9 as seen in Table 4 6. The average GPA was 3.52.

PAGE 55

55 Table 4 6 Participants by Grade Point Average Grade point average n Percent 3.5 4.0 3.0 3.4 2.5 2.9 2.0 2.4 260 140 19 3 61.6 33.1 4.5 .6 Total 422 99.8 Note. n =422 ; Missing=55 When asked to provide inform ation on their ethnicity less than one percent responded they were American Indian or Alaskan, 5% ( n =24) were Asian, 5.5% ( n =26) responded Black or African American ethnicity, over 63% ( n =304) responded White ethnicity, 9.9% ( n =47) responded Spanish/Hispan ic/Latino, over 2% ( n =13) responded other, and over 1% ( n =6) preferred not to answer. Responses can be seen in Table 4 7. Table 4 7 Ethnicity of Participants Ethnicity Number % American Indian or Alaskan 3 .6 Asian 24 5.0 Black or Afr ican American 26 5.5 White 304 63.7 Spanish/Hispanic/Latino 47 9.9 Other Prefer not to say 13 6 2.7 1.3 Total 423 88.7 Note : n =423; Missing=54 When asked to provide information on their majors, the following was data collected. The top three majors were Animal Sciences, Biology, and Agricultural Education and Communication, respectively. Re sults can be seen in Table 4 8.

PAGE 56

56 Table 4 8 Participants by Major Major n Percent Agricultural and Biological Engineering Agricultural Education and Communication Agricultural Operations Management Animal Sciences Biology Entomology and Nematology Environmental Management in Agriculture and Natural Resources Environmental Science Family, Youth and Community Sciences Food and Resource Economi cs Food Science and Human Nutrition Forest Resources and Conservation Horticultural Science Landscape and Nursery Horticulture Microbiology and Cell Science Natural Resource Conservation Packaging Science Plant Science Agronomy Plant Science Plant Path ology Soil and Water Science Statistics 4 35 3 107 47 21 1 10 19 27 12 5 6 6 14 4 1 2 1 4 1 1.0 8.3 .7 25.4 11.2 5.0 .2 2.4 4.5 6.4 2.9 1.2 1.4 1.4 3.3 1.0 .2 .5 .2 1.0 .2 Total 421 78.3 Note : n =421 Objective One: Describe the motiv ational factors of student leaders and non leaders in undergraduate students in CALS at UF who are involved in collegiate agricultural organizations : Respondents indicated their level of motivation on a seven point likert scale as indicated in Chapter 3. T description of the constructs can be found in Appendix B. Relatedness This variable selected for this objective is from the S elf Determination Theory

PAGE 57

57 connected to others, to caring for and being cared for by those others, to having a & Ryan, 2002, p. 7). Respondents, both leaders and non leaders, indicated feeling connected, M =6.2, SD =0.60, and M =5.9, SD =0.82, respectively. The relatedness was to those in their student organizations within CALS at UF as seen in Table 4 8. Table 4 8 Level of Relatedness of Leaders and Non leaders n M SD SE Leader 51 6.2 .60 .08 Non leader 289 5.9 .82 .05 Note : 1=Not at all true, 4=Somewhat true, 7=Very true, n =340; Missing=37 Compe tence The competence variable selected was selected under this objective in accordance with the SDT framework. As discussed in previous chapters, a n individual who experiences a high level of competence finds confidence in him or herself, as a result, wi ll be effective in action (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Respondents, both leaders and non leaders, indicated feeling between somewhat competent and very competent, M =5.8, SD =0.60 and M =5.7, SD =0.96, respectively, in the actions taken in their student organizations as seen in Table 4 9.

PAGE 58

58 Table 4 9 Level of Competence of Leaders and Non leaders n M SD SE Leader 59 5.8 .60 .08 Non leader 271 5.7 .96 .06 Autonomy The level of autonomy measures the perce ption of an individual over their choices. This construct measured the levels of self direction a student feels while acting within the constraints of the student organization (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Respondents, both leaders and non leaders, indicated feelin g just above somewhat autonomous, M =5.3, SD =0.78 and M =5.1, SD =0.75, in their organizations as seen in Table 4 10. Table 4 10 Level of Autonomy of Leaders and Non leaders n M SD SE Leader 40 5.3 .78 .12 Non leader 199 5.1 .75 .05 Objective Two: Describe the ability to lead of both leaders and non leaders by members of collegiate agricultural organizations : Questions 1 44 on the survey instrument were on a likert scale. The first 23 questions measured the five constructs of servant leadership and measured the ability

PAGE 59

59 organizationa l stewardship. As discussed in Chapter 3, five constructs were measure from the servant leadership framework. Barbuto and Wheeler (2006) refined previous work in servant leadership into five factors that appear conceptually and empirically distinct: altrui stic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship. Respondents indicated their ability to lead on a five point likert scale as indicated Respondents were asked to measure their ability to lead by rating their level of altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizati onal stewardship abilities. Altruistic calling rooted desire to make a both leaders and non leaders, indicated feelin g somewhat altruistic, M =3.7, SD =0.62 and M =3.6, SD =0.54, respectively, called to their organizations as seen in Table 4 11. Table 4 14 Level of Altruistic Calling of Leaders and Non leaders n M SD SE Leader 74 3.7 62 .07 Non leader 393 3.6 .54 .03 Note : 1=Not at all true, 4=Somewhat true, 7=Very true, n=467; Missing=10

PAGE 60

60 Emotional Healing dimensions of servant l Leaders responded between sometimes and often, M =3.6, SD =0.73. Non leaders also responded between some times and often, M =3.6, SD =0.76, confident in dealing with emotional or spiritual hardship as seen in Table 4 12. Table 4 12 Level of Emotional Healing of Leaders and Non leaders n M SD SE Leader 73 3.6 .73 .09 Non l eader 394 3.6 .76 .04 Note : 1=Not at all true, 4=Somewhat true, 7=Very true, n =467; Missing=10 Wisdom 06, p. 318 319). Both leaders and non leaders felt they often, M =4.2, SD =0.68 and M =4.1, SD =0.91, used their awareness of surroundings and anticipated consequences in dealing with their organizations as seen in Table 4 13. Table 4 13 Level of Wisdom of L eaders and Non leaders n M SD SE Leader 74 4.2 .68 .08 Non leader 395 4.1 .91 .04 Note : 1=Not at all true, 4=Somewhat true, 7=Very true, n =467; Missing=10

PAGE 61

61 Persuasive Mapping The fourth dimensional construct, persuasive, offering comp 2006, p. 319). Both leaders and non leaders felt between sometimes and often, M =3.7, SD =0.70 and M =3.5, SD =0.75, respectively, that they used solid reasoning and mental frameworks in dealing wi th others in their organizations as seen in Table 4 14. Table 4 14 Level of Persuasive Mapping of Leaders and Non leaders n M SD SE Leader 74 4.3 .65 .08 Non leader 394 4.0 .67 .03 Note : 1=Not at all true 4=Somewhat true, 7=Very true, n =467; Missing=10 Organizational stewardship organization to make a positive contribution to society through community devel opment, often, M =4.3, SD =0.65, and always acting as organizational stewards of their organizations. Non leaders felt they between sometimes and often, M =4.0, SD =0.67, acted as organizational stewards of their organizations as seen in Table 4 15.

PAGE 62

62 Table 4 15 Level of Organizational Stewardship of Leaders and Non leaders n M SD SE Leader 74 4.3 .65 .08 Non leader 394 4.0 .67 .03 Note : 1=Not at all true, 4=Somewhat true, 7=Very true, n =467; Missing=10 Objective Three: Compare differences in motivational factors in leaders and non leader members of collegiate agricultural organizations This study measured the motivational factors in leaders and non leaders of members of collegiate agricultural organizations. Eight constructs measured leaders and non leaders and examined for significant differences using independent sample t tests. The first three constructs are associated with SDT were autonomy, competence, and relatedness. In order to establish significance, the p value must be .05 level of significance at a 95% confidence interval. There was no statistical significant difference in autonomy construct at th e specified or equal to the 0 .05 level, t(237) = 1.67, p > .05. Table 4 16 illustrates the results. Table 4 16 Independent Samples t test for Autonomy n M SD df t p Leader 40 5.3 .79 237 1.67 .08 Non leader 199 5.1 .75 Note. Correlation is significant at the p < .05 Level, 2 Tailed. There was no statistical significant difference in competence construct at the specified p .05 level, t (328) = .882, p > .05. Table 4 17 illustrates the results.

PAGE 63

63 Table 4 17 Independent Samples t test for Competence n M SD df t p Leader 59 5.8 .60 328 .882 .378 Non leader 271 5.7 .96 Note. Correlation is significant at the p < .05 Level, 2 Tailed. There was a significant difference in relatedness construct at the specified .05 level, t (86.4) = 2.85, p < .0 5. Table 4 18 illustrates the results. The results show that the average scores for leaders and non leaders differ for re latedness. Table 4 18 Independent Samples t test for Relatedness n M SD df t p Leader 51 6.2 .60 86.4 2.85 .005 Non leader 289 5.9 .82 Note. Correlation is significant at the p < .05 Level, 2 Tailed. The next five constructs are associ ated with servant leadership theory. These constructs measured between leaders and non leaders are: altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship. There was a significant difference in altruistic calling construct at the specified p .05 level, t (465) = 2.15, p < 05 Table 4 19 illustrates the results. The results show that the average scores for leaders and non leaders differ for altruistic calling. Table 4 19 Independent Samples t test for Altruistic Calling n M SD df t p Leader 74 3.7 .62 465 2.15 .032 Non leader 393 3.6 .54 Note. Correlation is significant at the p < .05 Level, 2 Tailed. There was no significant difference in emotional healing construct at the specified .05 level, t (465) = 2.15, p < 05 Table 4 20 illustrates the results.

PAGE 64

64 Table 4 20 Independent Samples t test for Emotional Healing n M SD df t p Leader 73 3.6 .73 465 2.15 .882 Non leader 394 3.6 .76 Note. Correlation Is Significant At The p < .05 Level, 2 Tailed. There was n o significant difference in wisdom construct at the specified p .05 level, t (467) = .174, p < 05 Table 4 21 illustrates the results. Table 4 21 Independent Samples t test for Wisdom n M SD df t p Leader 74 4.2 .68 467 .174 .862 Non leader 395 4.1 .91 Note. Correlation Is Significant At The p < .05 Level, 2 Tailed. There was no significant difference in persuasive mapping construct at the specified p .05 level, t (466) = 1.88, p < .0 5 Table 4 22 illustrates the results. Table 4 22 In dependent Samples t test for Persuasive Mapping n M SD df t p Leader 72 3.7 .70 466 1.88 .06 Non leader 396 3.5 .75 Note. Correlation Is Significant At The p < .05 Level, 2 Tailed. There was a significant difference in organizational ste wardship construct at the specified p .05 level, t (466) = 3.33, p < 05 Table 4 23 illustrates the results. The results show that the average scores for leaders and non leaders differ for organizational stewardship.

PAGE 65

65 Table 4 23 Independent Samples t test for Organizational Stewardship n M SD df t p Leader 74 4.3 .65 466 3.33 .001 Non leader 394 4.0 .67 Note. Correlation Is Significant At The p < .05 Level, 2 Tailed. Objective Four: Examine the relationship between desire to lead and demographic characteristics : The pur pose of this research was to discover the motivating factors of students in the CALS at the UF to seek or accept leadership roles in student organizations. The demographic questions representing leadership involvements, academic classification, age, gender grade point average, ethnicity, transfer students, and major, along with eight constructs on competence, relatedness, autonomy, altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship were utilized for this corre lation. A Pearson product moment correlation was utilized examines this relationship. A Pearson product moment correlation was utilized to describe the demographic data. A Pearson product moment correlation is a standardized regression coefficient that me asures the relationship between two variables (Agresti & Finlay, 2009). In order to establish significance, the p value must be less than p .05 at a 95% confidence interval. between variables. Davis (1971) stated a value of r = +0.70 or higher show a very strong positive association. Values of r between r = +0.50 to +0.69 indicated a positive substantial association. Values of r between r = +0.30 to +0.49 show a moderate

PAGE 66

66 posit ive association. Values of r between r = +0.10 to +0.29 show a low positive association. Anything under r = +0.10 implies an insignificant positive association. If r = .0, there is no association between variables. Conversely, two variables may also be neg atively correlated. Davis also stated a value of r = 0.70 or higher show a very strong negative association. Values of r between r = 0.50 to 0.69 indicated a negative substantial association. Values of r between r = 0.30 to 0.49 show a moderate negati ve association. Values of r between r = 0.10 to 0.29 show a low negative association. Anything under r = 0.10 implies an insignificant negative association (Davis, 1971). correlation s in determining if the data was significant. Classification and persuasive mapping ( r =0.149) and competence and GPA ( r =0.15) showed a low positive correlation as seen in Table 2 24. There were no other positive correlations between demographic variables and the constructs measured. Relatedness and gender ( r =0.216), altruistic calling and gender ( r = .157), emotional healing and gender ( r = .204), and organizational stewardship and gender ( r = .149) showed a low negative correlation as seen in Table 4 2 4. No other negative correlations between constructs and demographic variables existed in the data. As seen in Table 2 25, student leaders had three significant correlations. First, a moderate negative association was found between gender and altruistic ca lling (r = .337). A low positive correlation was found between ethnicity and competence (r = .288) and ethnicity and wisdom (r =.243).

PAGE 67

67 As seen in Table 2 26, non leaders had seven significant correlations between variables. A low negative correlation was found between gender and relatedness (r = .230), gender and altruistic calling (r = .125), gender and emotional healing (r = .202), gender and organizational stewardship (r = .158), and ethnicity and organizational stewardship (r = .125). A low positive c orrelation was found between year and relatedness (r = .119) and classification and persuasive mapping (r =.160).

PAGE 68

68 Table 4 24 Relationship Be tween Desire, Ability To Lead, a nd Demographic Characteristics Classification Year of birth Gender GPA Ethnicity Major Autonomy .058 .002 .088 .048 .100 .090 Competence .047 .006 .022 .150* .061 .079 Relatedness .022 .053 .216* .023 .071 .051 Altruistic Calling .020 .035 .157* .014 .065 .035 Emotional Healing .035 .098* .204* .009 .000 .053 Wis dom .077 .022 .037 .020 .025 .035 Persuasive Mapping .149* .077 .082 .008 .065 .021 Organizational Stewardship .065 .036 .149* .050 .090 .006 Note: *Correlation is significant at the p .05 levels, 2 tailed.

PAGE 69

69 Table 4 25. Relationship Between and Desire and Ability To Lead, a nd Demographic Characteristics Classification Year of birth Gender GPA Ethnicity Major Autonomy .036 .035 .117 .192 .044 .104 Competence 006 .200 .008 .020 .288* .018 Relatedness .017 .051 .205 .117 .126 .044 Altruistic Calling .011 .149 .337 .110 .111 .084 Emotional Healing .119 .095 .202 120 .114 .149 Wisdom 105 .041 .116 .033 .243 .190 Persuasive Mappin g 082 .012 .048 .009 .073 .018 Organizational Stewardship 100 .036 .202 .027 .028 .213 Note: *Correlation is significant at the p .05 levels, 2 tailed

PAGE 70

70 Table 4 26. Relationship Between Non l and Desire and Ability To Lead, a nd Demographic Characteristics Classification Year of birth Gender GPA Ethnicity Major Autonomy .09 8 .068 .107 .007 .121 .108 Competence .032 .052 .035 .166 .025 .095 Relatedness .057 .119* .230 .043 .076 .051 Altruistic Calling .043 .024 .125 .038 .062 .040 Emotional Healing .011 .096 .202 .011 .020 .050 Wisdom .094 .032 .059 .018 .013 .01 5 Persuas ive Mapping .160 .072 .096 .008 .07 5 .03 1 Organizational Stewardship .019 .014 .158 .059 .125* .04 6 Note: *Correlation is significant at the p .05 levels, 2 taile d

PAGE 71

71 Summary This chapter presents the findings of this research. The chapter began with a summary of chapters, followed by a description of demographics that outlined the results of the seven demographic questions from the questionnai re. Next, a description of each objective, including a description of each construct and presentation of the number of participants, mean, standard deviation, and standard error. Following those descriptions, the summary of findings is presented for each c onstruct Eight theoretical constructs were measured during data collection. Those constructs were relatedness, autonomy, competence, altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship.

PAGE 72

72 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction Chapter 1 described the importance of colleges of agriculture producing graduates with competence in subject matter and leadership. The first chapter also showed the importance of research in student involvement and develop ment. Chapter 1 also established the objectives for this research. Chapter 2 presented a discussion on the theoretical and conceptual frameworks. Self determination theory and servant leadership theory were the foundational theories used in the development of the conceptual model for this study. A comprehensive literature review was also conducted. Chapter 3 described the methods utilized in this study, including the research design, population, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis procedures Chapter 4 discussed the findings of the study. The chapter began with a description of the population and results of the reliability analysis. Following the analysis, the chapter presented the findings of the study for each objective in detail. This ch apter presents a discussion of findings and conclusions from this research study. Each research objective is stated along with a discussion and recommendations for further research in this field. Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this study was to disc over the motivating factors that students possess in the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences (CALS) at the University of Florida (UF) to seek out or accept leadership roles in student organizations. The objectives for this study are as follows:

PAGE 73

73 1. Desc ribe the motivational leadership factors of student leaders and non leaders in undergraduate students in CALS at UF who are involved in collegiate agricultural organizations 2. Describe the ability to lead of both leaders and non leaders by members of collegi ate agricultural organizations 3. Compare differences in motivational factors in leaders and non leader members of collegiate agricultural organizations 4. Examine the relationship between desire to lead and demographic characteristics Methodology The populatio n for this study was all undergraduates in collegiate organizations in the CALS at UF. A convenience sample was taken of 32 student organizations registered with the Agricultural and Life Sciences College Council (ALSCC). There were 1,019 members registere d with ALSCC during the fall 2010 semester. Of the 1,019 members, 540 of were surveyed. That accounted for a 53.0% response rate. Of those 27 organizations, 21 were surveyed and data was collected. This accounted for a 77.7% organizational response rate. Summary of Findings Objective 1: Describe the motivational leadership factors of student leaders and non leaders in undergraduate students in CALS at UF who are involved in collegiate agricultural organizations This objective aimed to identify the motivati onal factors of student leaders through the theoretical framework of the self determination theory. The three constructs measured were relatedness, competence, and autonomy. Respondents indicated their level of motivation on a seven point likert scale as i ndicated in chapter three. This scale

PAGE 74

74 Both leaders and non leaders reported being between somewhat and very related, M =6.2, SD =0.60, and M =5.9, SD =0.82, respectively, to their student organization. Additionally, both leaders and non leaders indicated being between somewhat competent and very competent, M =5.8, SD =0.60 and M =5.7, SD =0.96, in the actions taken in their stu dent organizations. According to Deci and Ryan (2002), these students indicated they felt like they were effective in the actions they took in regards to their respective organizations. Leaders and non leaders, indicated being just above somewhat autonomou s, M =5.3, SD =0.78 and M =5.1, SD =0.75, with respect to having control over their own choices within their organizations Objective 2: Describe the ability to lead of both leaders and non leaders by members of collegiate agricultural organizations This objec tive aimed to describe the ability of leaders and non leaders to lead through the five constructs of servant leadership: altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006). Respondent s indicated their ability to lead on a five point likert scale as indicated Respo ndents were asked to measure their ability to lead by rating their level of altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship abilities. Leaders and non leaders responded they felt between somewhat and often, M =5.3, SD =0.78 and M =5.1, SD =0.75, having an altruistic calling. These students felt

PAGE 75

75 between somewhat and often a deep rooted desire to make a positive difference in regards to others in their student organization. Both leaders and non leaders reported be ing confident often, M =3.6, SD =0.73 and M =3.6, SD =0.76, in dealing with emotional or spiritual hardships. Furthermore, both leaders and non leaders felt they often, M =4.2, SD =0.68 and M =4.1, SD =0.91, used their wisdom, or awareness of surroundings and anti cipated consequences in dealing with their organizations. Both leaders and non leaders felt often, M =3.7, SD =0.70 and M =3.5, SD =0.75, that they used techniques that persuaded others in their organizations to visualize their organizations future. Leaders fe lt between sometimes and often, M =4.3, SD =0.65, they prepare their organizations to make a positive social change. Non leaders felt they often, M =4.0, SD =0.67, prepared their organizations in making a positive social change. Objective 3: Compare differenc es in motivational factors of leaders and non leader members of collegiate agricultural organizations This objective sought to compare the differences between motivational factors in leaders and non leader members of collegiate agricultural student organiz ations within CALS at UF. As described in Chapter 3, t tests were used to establish statistically significant relationships between leaders and non leaders in eight constructs. An alpha level of p < 05 was established for statistical significance. A p val ue below this level was considered statistically significant. The first three constructs measured the constructs associated with self determination theory. Those three constructs were autonomy, relatedness, and competence. A significant difference was fo und between leaders and non leaders in the relatedness construct. Leaders had a higher relatedness score, M =5.3, SD =0.79

PAGE 76

76 than the non leaders, M =5.1, SD =0.75. There was a significant difference in relatedness construct at the specified .05 level, t (86.4) = 2.85, p < .005. The last five constructs measured the level of servant leadership of leaders and non leaders. The five constructs were altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship. A significant diff erence was found between leaders and non leaders in the altruistic calling construct. Leaders had a higher altruistic calling score, M =3.7, SD =0.62, than the score of the non leaders, M =3.6, SD =0.54. Additionally, a significant difference was found between leaders and non leaders in the organizational stewardship construct. Leaders, M =4.3, SD =0.65, reported having a greater ability to set a vision to assist the surrounding community than did non leaders, M =3.6, SD =0.54. Objective 4: Examine the relationshi p between desire to lead and demographic characteristics The eight constructs measured to achieve this objective were relatedness, competence, autonomy, altruistic calling, emotional healing, wisdom, persuasive mapping, and organizational stewardship. A P earson product moment correlation was conducted to identify relationships that existed between the eight measured constructs and the demographic variables identified in this research. A Pearson product moment correlation is a standardized regression coeffi cient that measures the relationship between two variables. In order to establish significance, the p value must be less than duct moment correlations in determining if the data was significant. Classification and persuasive mapping (r =0.149) and competence and GPA (r =0.15) showed a low positive

PAGE 77

77 correlation. There were no other positive correlations between demographic varia bles and the constructs measured. Relatedness and gender (r =0.216), altruistic calling and gender (r = 0.157), emotional healing and gender (r = 0.204), and organizational stewardship and gender (r = 0.149) showed a low negative correlation. No other neg ative correlations between constructs and demographic variables existed in the data. Conclusions The following conclusions were drawn based upon findings of the study: Objective 1 Describe the motivational leadership factors of student leaders and non lead ers in undergraduate students in CALS at UF who are involved in collegiate agricultural organizations : Undergraduates in CALS student organizations feel a sense of relatedness and connectedness to others in their organizations Undergraduates in CALS studen t organizations feel competent in the decisions they make about their respective organizations Undergraduates in CALS student organizations have autonomy in the decisions they make in regards to their organizations Objective 2 Describe the ability to lead of both leaders and non leaders by members of collegiate agricultural organizations : Leaders and non leaders both show high strengths in wisdom, persuasive mapping, and emotional healing in student organizations Leaders show greater strength in altruistic calling and organizational stewardship Objective 3 Compare differences in motivational factors in leaders and non leader members of collegiate agricultural organizations : Leaders and non leaders both feel as if they have autonomy over their own destiny and choices within their organizations A student is more likely to become a leader if they have a greater amount of relatedness to others in their student organization

PAGE 78

78 Leaders of CALS student organizations are better organizational stewards than non leaders O bjective 4 Examine the relationship between desire to lead and demographic characteristics : CALS student organizations have a higher percentage of juniors and seniors than freshmen and sophomores CALS student organizations on average are made up of a great er amount of females There is a correlation between classification (freshmen, sophomore, junior, and senior) and persuasive mapping There is a correlation between gender and relatedness, altruistic calling, emotional healing, and organizational stewardship There is a correlation between GPA and competence Discussion and Implications The success of the agricultural industry is dependent on college of agriculture graduates possessing not only technical skills, but also leadership skills (Andelt, Barrett, & Bo sshamer, 1997). During the four years a graduate spends obtaining their degree, it has been shown student involvement leads to student development (Astin, 1977, 1993; Ewing, Bruce, & Ricketts, 2009). In most universities and colleges it is evident the impo rtance of student development based on the amount of funding, time, and energy universities and colleges place into extracurricular involvement. The importance of involvement is apparent, however, less research has been conducted concerning the importance of leadership involvement and the development a student receives from the student leadership experience in colleges of agriculture. This research is aimed to identify what motivates students to seek out and accept a leadership position. Self determination theory (SDT) and servant leadership (SL) theory were utilized in this research. The SDT was used to determine what motivated students to seek out

PAGE 79

79 and accept leadership positions in colleges of agriculture. The SL theory was used to establish the ability of leaders versus non leaders to lead student organizations. Eight constructs were measured in this study. Relatedness, competence, and autonomy persuasive mapping, an d organizational stewardship measured the levels of leadership of the leaders versus non leaders. As established in Chapter 2, leaders were defined as a member holding one of the following officer positions: president, vice president, treasurer, or secreta ry. Of the three constructs measured under SDT, relatedness was the only construct that was statistically significant with distinguishing leaders versus non leaders. However, it is important to note the scores for competence and autonomy were above the mi This indicates that leaders and non leaders are both competent in their actions and they felt autonomy in their decisions in student organizations. This leads to the conclusion t hat a student that possesses the motivation to seek out and accept a leadership role is someone who has greater amount of relatedness, or connections within the student organization. Deci and Ryan (2002) defined relatedness as having a connection with othe rs and having a sense of belongingness. Intuitively, in democratic organizations, students who are better connected and related would have the best probability of getting elected and receiving leadership opportunities. A sense of relatedness is the separat ing motivator to seek out and accept leadership positions within collegiate student organizations within colleges of agriculture.

PAGE 80

80 Servant leadership was an indicator of leadership ability in this study. Altruistic calling and organizational stewardship we re the two constructs of servant leadership that had statistically significant differences. However, the three other constructs had high means, even though they did not have significant differences. Wisdom, persuasive mapping, and emotional healing were al l constructs that had above the middle score on the questionnaire. This indicates students have high leadership potential in these areas, but the difference between the non leaders and leaders ability to lead is found in the altruistic calling and organiza tional stewardship constructs. Altruistic calling is the internal sense to want to make a positive action in lives. Considering the time and effort student leaders put into their student organizations, it makes sense that they would have a greater level of altruistic calling. Likewise, leaders that show organizational stewardship as leader of a student organization normally have a greater ability to plan and prepare members for service to the department, college, or university. The greater the con nection between members of an organization, the greater chance more members will be motivated to seek out and accept leadership positions in their organizations. Undergraduates who become motivated to take leadership positions, as shown in conceptual model (see Figure 2 1), will receive personal development through involvement and enhanced motivation Figure 2 1 Acceptance of a leadership role conceptual model

PAGE 81

81 Figure 2 1 Acceptance of a leadership role conceptual model As seen in the model, higher levels of motivation are likely to influence the student to accep t additional leadership roles and, in turn, receive more development in the leadership competency. Undergraduates who are motivated to seek out and accept a leadership role will also benefit from developing their level of leadership ability. The developmen after graduation. The greater the net value of employees, the greater these graduates will impact on the agricultural industry. Furthermore, findings indicated several demographic relationships. First, a significant relationship was found between persuasive mapping and classification. Assuming there were no lurking variables, it makes sense that juniors and seniors, who

PAGE 82

82 make up most of the leadership positions, would have a higher a bility to persuade members to do things a certain way. A lurking variable is a unmeasured variable that influences the correlation of two independent variables indirectly (Agresti & Finlay, 2009). Especially those juniors and seniors have been around the o rganizations and hold institutional knowledge. Findings also indicated a relationship between gender and relatedness, altruistic calling, emotional healing, and organizational stewardship. These findings would suggest that gender influences a undergraduat emotional healing, and organizational stewardship. would be an indicator of how competent they were in the decisions they made in an und ergraduate student organizational setting. National Research Agenda This research aided the agricultural education research agenda by furthering th e ability of college of agricultural faculty and staff to develop and prepare graduates to the workforce through leadership development ). This research aided in the further understanding of how to support and aid student development in colleges of agriculture and life sciences Overall, this research is consistent with the national agenda by helping the sustainability and succession of ac ademic agricultural leadership programs (Osborne, n.d.)

PAGE 83

83 Recommendations Based on the results and conclusions of this study, the researcher has made recommendations for practitioners and researchers. Recommen dations for Practice There are several recommendations for CALS faculty, staff, and advisors at UF and other similar colleges of agriculture with the same structure and format as student organizations at UF based on the results of this study. Faculty and staff who serve as advisors for student organizations are encouraged to spend time at the beginning of each semester encouraging activities that will connect the members of an organization. As seen from SDT, a student with a higher level of relatedness is more likely to seek out and accept a leadership position. For example, an advisor could enhance the amount of membership development activities like community service, outdoor trips, establish mentor programs, and partake in social activities in an organiz ation. Fostering these types of membership development that connect the members of the organization, resulting in higher levels of relatedness. According to Deci and Ryan (2002) this relatedness will lead to a greater amount motivation in regards to the st udent organization. The greater the motivation, the higher chance more non leader students will express interest in leadership positions. It is also recommended leaders and non leaders take the survey developed in this study at the beginning of each seme ster to measure the levels of motivation and ability to lead of each of the members of the study. This would allow for advisors and undergraduates to measure the change in student development accurately from one semester to the next and to identify circums tances that certain areas of motivation should enhance. This feedback would allow individual students to better understand

PAGE 84

84 their strengths and weaknesses in their motivation levels and ability to lead in student organizations. CALS faculty, staff, and ad visors could use these research findings to implement new protocol if an organization is struggling to produce constant and satisfactory leadership. This procedure might be to first assess the levels of leadership ability in the organization. Contingent on certain members having satisfactory scores in all five leadership constructs, especially altruistic calling and organizational stewardship, the advisor could then place the students in an opportunity to seek out and accept leadership roles by increasing t he level of relatedness in the group setting. Recommendations for Research This study focused particularly on CALS at UF, however research in other colleges of agriculture and life sciences at different universities is important to further assess the le vels of motivation and ability to lead throughout the nation. With this research, individuals that work with student organizations could further understand the levels of motivation and ability to lead in student organizations. Additionally, there is a ne ed to research understanding if tenure in a student organization has a correlation with seeking out and accepting a leadership position. This would be beneficial in understanding the connection between age, tenure, and level of leadership involvement in un dergraduates. A certain amount of overlap occurred during this research with students who were in several organizations. It seems some undergraduates were not just connected to one student organization, but were in several or more organizations. It would be beneficial to understand more about why students with the motivation to seek out and accept one

PAGE 85

85 leadership position often seek out and accept more leadership positions in different organizations. A large proportion of students surveyed in this research were females. Further research into why there are so many more females in colleges of agriculture and life sciences than males would help further understand the demographics of the populations being surveyed. This skewed variable may have influenced the d ata. Furthermore, research to better understand the possible relationship between gender and relatedness, altruistic calling, and emotional healing. One of the implications of the population surveyed was the homogenous nature of the sample might have led to similar population responses. Further research might examine the effect size that gender had on the results of this study. A heterogeneous mixture might be able to be examined by examining a cross section of colleges of agricultural and life sciences ac ross the nation. A growing trend in higher education is online learning. However, results of this the growth in competencies such as leadership that the agricultur al industry demands occurs outside the traditional classroom setting in settings such as student organizations. Online education is a great supplemental tool to an educational experience, but should not replace the experience and growth students receive fr om involvement on a physical campus. Further research should be conducted on the culture and value systems in colleges in universities. Identifying value systems of colleges will assist researchers in colligate settings in extrapolating research findings from college to college.

PAGE 86

86 In addition, further research should be conducted on what happens to the leaders and non leaders from student organizations after graduation. It would be interesting to find if leaders were more successful in industry than non le aders. Is there a significant correlation between student leaders who have leadership positions and leadership roles in industry? Summary The beginning of this chapter presented a summary of purpose and objectives. The methodology of the study is laid ou t including the organizational and member response rates. Next, a summary of findings and recommendations for further research were presented based on the four objectives Each objective is stated and inferences of statistical analysis were discussed and p resented in detail Additionally, a discussion of research conclusions and recommendations for further research were presented and related to the conceptual model discussed in earlier chapters This chapter also outlines how this research coincided with th e national research agenda

PAGE 87

87 APPENDIX A LIST OF ALL COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL AND LIFE SCIENCES STUDENT ORGANIZATIONS Agricultural Communicators and Leaders of Tomorrow Agricultural Education and Communications Graduate Student Association Agricultural Eco nomics Club Agricultural Operations Management Club Agronomy/ Soils Club Air and Waste Management Association Alpha Epsilon Alpha Gamma Rho Alpha Zeta American Society of Agricultural and biological Engineers American Water Works Association Animal Scie nces Graduate Student Association Bioenergy and Sustainable Technology Society Blok and Bridle CALS Ambassadors The Campus Kitchens Project Collegiate 4 H Collegiate Farm Bureau Collegiate FFA/Agricultural Education and Communication Society Dairy Sci ence Doctor of Plant Medicine student Organization Entomology

PAGE 88

88 Environmental Horticulture Club Environmental Horticulture Graduate Students Association Ethnoecology Society Equestrian Club Family, Youth, and Community Sciences Florida Water Environmen t Association, Student Chapter Food Science and Human Nutrition Club Forestry Club Gator Chapter of the Florida Association for Food Protection Gator Citrus Gator Collegiate Cattlewomen's Association Geomatics Student Association Horticulture Sciences G raduate Student Club InvestiGators Research Honor Society Marine Biology Microbiology and Cell Sciences Student Organization Microbiology Pre graduate club Minorities in Agriculture, Natural Resources and Related Sciences (MANRRS) Organic and Sustainab le Agriculture Club Packaging Science Club Phi Tau Sigma The Honor Society of Food Scientists Pre Veterinary Medicine Club Public Interest Environment Conference

PAGE 89

89 School of Natural Resources and Environment Council Sigma Alpha Society for American Fores ters Society for Viral Studies Students United in the Research of Fisheries Turfgrass Club Unban Entomological Society Wetlands Club Wildlife Graduate Student Association Wildlife Society Xi Sigma Pi The Forestry honor Society

PAGE 90

90 APPENDIX B CONSTRUCT DEFINITIONS Relatedness. Using empirical processes, Deci and Ryan (2000) found that being connected to those in a particular social network enhanced your motivation levels. Relatedness is a construct in this study examining how connected members feel to th eir peers. Competence. Deci and Ryan (2000) found that optimal motivation levels and competence in abilities are correlated. This construct was appropriate to use in this research to measure how competent individuals in organizations feel in their leaders hip abilities. Autonomy. innate psychological needs that are the basis for their self 2000, p. 68). Autonomy in this study will measure the levels of self dire ction from student leaders. Altruistic calling rooted desire to make a both leaders and non leaders, indicated feelin g somewhat altruistic, M =3.7, SD =0.62 and M =3.6, SD =0.54, respectively, called to their organizations as seen in Table 4 11. Emotional Healing dimensions of servant leadership, is d

PAGE 91

91 Wisdom (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006, p. 318 319). Persuasive Mapping dimensional construct, mental framework they encourage others to visualiz 2006, p. 319). Organizational stewardship organizatio n to make a positive contribution to society through community development,

PAGE 92

92 LIST OF REFERENCES Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (2009). Statistical methods for the social sciences Upper Saddle River, N J: Pearson Prentice Hall. Agricultural and life sciences college council (2009). Retrieved from http://cals.ufl.edu/alscc/ Andelt, L. L., Barrett, L. A., & Bosshamer, B. K. (1997). Employer assessmen t of the skill preparation of students from the college of agricultural sciences and natural resources university of Nebraska Lincoln: Implications for teaching and curriculum. North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture, 41 (4) Retrieved from http://nacta.fp.expressacademic.org/article.php?autoID=394&issueID=101 Anderson, R., Manoogian, S. T., & Rezick, J. S. (1976). The undermining and enhancing of i ntrinsic motivation in preschool children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34 (5), 915 922. Angyal, A. (1965). Neurosis and treatment: A holistic theory New York, London, Sydney: John Wiley and Sons. Association of American Colleges and Univ ersities. (2002). Greater Expectations: A new vision for learning as a nation goes to college. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/ Astin, A. W. (1977). Four critical years. effects of college on beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge San Francisco: Jossey Bass Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Avolio, B. J., & Locke, E. E. (2002). Philosophies of leader motivation: Altruism versus egoism. Leadership Quarterly, 13 (2) Retrieved from: http:/ /www.sciencedirect.com/science Awamleh, R., & Gardner, W. L. (1999). Perceptions of leader charisma and effectiveness: The effects of vision content, delivery, and organizational performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 10 (3), 345 373. doi: 10.1016/S1048 98 43(99)00022 3 Bass, B. M. (2010). The future of leadership in learning organizations. Journal of Leadership Studies, 7 (3), 18. Barbuto, J. E., Scholl, R. W. (1998). M otivation sources inventory: development and validation of new scales to measure an inte grative taxonomy of motivation. Psychological Reports, 82(1), 1011 1022.

PAGE 93

93 Barbuto Jr., J. E., & Wheeler, D. W. (2006). Scale development and construct clarification of servant leadership. Group & Organization Management, 31 (3), 300 326. doi:10.1177/10596 01106287091 Barling, J., Slater, F., & Kelloway, K. E. (2000). Transformational leadership and emotional intelligence: An exploratory study. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21 (3), 157 161. doi:244076951 Bierly III, P. E., Kessler, E. H., & Christensen, E. W. (2000). Organizational learning, knowledge and wisdom. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 13 (6), 595 618. doi:10.1108/09534810010378605 Birkenholz, R. J., & Schumacher, L. G. (1994). Leadership skills of college of agriculture graduates. Journal of Agricultural Education, 35 (4), 1 8. doi:202.198.141.77 Casner Lotto, Jill. (2006). Are they really ready to work? basic knowledge and applied skil ls of new entrants to the 21st c entury U. S. workforce The Conference Board, Inc. Retrived from: http://p21.org/documents/FINAL_REPORT_PDF09 29 06.pdf Choi, Y., & Mai Dalton, R. R. (1998). On the leadership function of self sacrifice. The Leadership Quarterly, 9 (4), 475 501. doi: 10.1016/S1048 9843(98)90012 1 Coleman, A. (1998). Legacy leadership: Stewardship and courage. Health Progress, 79 (6), 28 42. Cooper, D. L., Healy, M. A., & Simpson, J. (1994). Student development through involvement: Specific changes over time. Journal of College Student Development, 35 98 102. Dannhauser, Z., Boshoff, A. B., (2006). The relationships between servant leadership, trust, team commitment and demographic variables. Servant Leadership Research Roundtable. Davis, J. A. (1971). Elementary survey analysis Englewood Clif fs, N.J.: Prentice Hall. DeCharms, R. (1970). Personal causation; the internal affective determinants of behavior New York: Academic Press. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta analytic review of experiments examining the effects of ext rinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125 (6), 627 668. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). In Aronson E. (Ed.), Intrinsic motivation and Self Determination in human behavior New York, NY and London, UK: Plenum Press.

PAGE 94

94 Deci, E. L. (1980). The psychology of self determination Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the Self Determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry 11, 227 268. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Handbook on self determination research Rochester: University of Rochester Press. Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., Gagn, M., Leone, D. R., Usunov, J., & Kornazheva, B. P. (2001). Need satisfaction, motivation, and well being in the work o rganizations of a former Eastern Bloc country. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27 930 942. Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2009). Internet, mail and mixed mode surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons. Dommeyer, C., Baum, P., Hanna, R., Chapman, K., (2004). Gathering faculty teaching evaluations by in class and online surveys: their effects on response rates and evaluations. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 29( 5), 611 623. d oi: 10.1080/02602930410001689171 Druskat, V. U., & Pescosolido, A. T. (2002). The content of effective teamwork mental models in self managing teams: Ownership, learning, and heedful interrelating. Human Relations, 55 (3), 283 314. doi:10.1177/0018726702553 001 Emmerich, R. (2001). Motivating employees during tough times. Business Credit, 103 (7), 10. Estevez, B. J. (2007). Levels of student development in the college of agricultural and life sciences at the University of Florida [electronic resource Gaine sville, Fla.: University of Florida. Retrieved from http://purl.fcla.edu/fcla/etd/UFE0021438 Ewing, J., Bruce, J. A., & Ricketts, K. G. (2009). Effective leadership development for underg raduates: How important is active participation in collegiate organizations? Journal of Leadership Education, 7 (3), 118 132. Evans N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M. (1998). Student Development in College: Theory, Research, and Practice San Francisco: Jo ssey Bass. Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Renn, K. A., & Patton, L. D. (2010). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

PAGE 95

95 Foubert, J. D., & Grainger, L. U. (2006). Effec ts of involvement in clubs and organizations on the psychosocial development of first year and senior college students. Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education, 43 (1), 166 181. Retrieved from http://okstate.academia.edu/documents/0011/1822/foube rt_ graingerpub.pdf Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 14 (6), 693 727. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.09.001 Giltmier, J. W. (1990). On stewardship ethics among land leaders. Journal of Soil & Water Conserva tion, 45 (6), 27 30. Graham, D. L. (2001). Are we preparing the society ready graduate? Proceedings of the 28th Annual National Agricultural Education Research Conference. Retrieved from http://aaae.okstate.edu/proceedings/2001/grahamd.pdf Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The Servant as Leader Indianapolis, IN: Greenleaf Center. Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). In Spears L. C. (Ed.), Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimat e power and greatness Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press. Greenleaf, R. K. (2002). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness New York: Paulist Press. Greenleaf, R. K., & Spears, L. C. (1998). The power of servant leadership : Essays San Francisco, Calif.: Berrett Koehler Publishers. Ilardi, B. C., Leone, D., Kasser, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). Employee and supervisor ratings of motivation: Main effects and discrepancies associated with job satisfaction and adjustment in a fac tory setting. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 23, 1789 1805. Isaac, R. G., Zerbe, W. J., & Pitt, D. C. (2001). Leadership and application: The effective application of expectancy theory. Journal of Managerial Issues, 3 (2), 212 226. Retrieved from htt p://www.cs.unca.edu/~manns/MotivationExpectancy Theory.pdf Israel, G. D. (1992b). Sampling issues: Nonresponse (No. PEOD 9). Gainesville, FL: IFAS, University of Florida. Jorion, P. A. (2000). Value at risk The new benchmark for managing financial risk Bl acklick : McGraw Hill Companies. Kanungo, R. N., & Conger, J. A. (1993). Promoting altruism as a corporate goal. The Academy of Management Executive (1993 2005), 7 (3), 37 48.

PAGE 96

96 Kasser, T., Davey, J., & Ryan, R. M. (1992). Motivation, dependability, and emplo yee supervisor discrepancies in psychiatric vocational rehabilitation settings. Rehabilitation Psychology 37, 175 187. Kaufman, E. (2007). Strengthening the voice and farm bureau foundations: Explaining local board performance as related to a professional development program for a nonprofit membership organization (Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida). Retrieved from http://purl.fcla.edu/fcla/etd/UFE0019612 Lepper, M. R., & Greene, D. (1975). Turning play into work: Effects of adult surveillance and extrinsic rewards on children's intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31 (3), 4 79 486. Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly 19 161 177. Love, G. M., & Yoder, E. P. (1989). An assessment of undergraduate education in American colleges of agriculture. part I: Perceptions of faculty. part II: Perceptions of graduating seniors. part III: Perceptions of other university students (ED315573). (Non Journal. Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park. Coll. of Agriculture.: Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. Science and Education Administration. McMillan, J. H., & Schmacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence based inquiry Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc. Osborne, E. W. (n.d.). National research agenda: Agricultural education and communication Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, Department of Agricultural Education and Communication: Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research San Francisco: Jossey Bass Higher & Adult Education. Ricketts, K. G. (2005). The importance of community leadership to successful rural communities in Florida Gainesville, Fla.: University of Florida. Sanford, N. E., Adelson, J., (1962). The American college; a psychological and social interpretation of the higher learning Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues New York: Wiley. Sendjaya, S., Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. C (2008). Defining and measuring serva nt leadership behavior in organizations. Journal of Management Studies 45(2), 402 424.

PAGE 97

97 Schumacher, L. G., & Swan, M. K. (1993). Need for Formal Leadership Training for Students in a Land Grant College of Agriculture. Journal of Agricultural Education. 34( 3) Retrieved from http://202.198.141.77/upload/soft/001/34 03 01.pdf Self determination theory (2008). Retrieved from : http://www.psych.rochester.edu/SDT/ Sommers, W. B. (199 1). Relationship Between College Student Organization Leadership Experience and Post College Leadership Activity (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/jspui/bitstream/1957/9986/1/Sommers_ Walter%20B._1992.pdf Sosik, H. J ., & Megerian, L. E. (1999). Understanding leader emotional intelligence and performance. Group & Organization Management, 24 (3), 367 390. doi:10.1177/1059601199243006 Spears, L. (1995). Reflections on Robert K. Greenleaf and servant leadership. Leadershi p & Organization Development Journal, 17 (7), 33. doi:10.1108/01437739610148367 Sternberg, R. J. (2003). WICS: A model of leadership in organizations. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2 (4), 386 401. Stone, D. N., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (200 9). Beyond talk: Creating autonomous motivation through Self Determination Theory. Journal of General Management, 34(3), 75 91. Suvedi, M., & Heyboer, G. (2004). Perceptions of recent graduates and employers about undergraduate programs in the college of a griculture and natural resources at Michigan state university: A follow up study. North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture, 48 (1) Tower, A., J. (2003). Effects of charismatic influence training on attitudes, behavior, and performance. Personnel Psychology, 56 (2), 363 381. doi:10.1111/j.1744 6570.2003.tb00154.x Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Intrinsic versus extrinsic goal contents in self determination theory: Another look at the quality of academic motivation. Educational P sychology, 41 (1), 9 41. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4101_4 von Stein, M. F. (2008). Undergraduate student involvement in collegiate student organizations in colleges of agriculture Gainesville, FL: University of Florida. Weymes, E. (2003). Relationships not leadership sustain successful organizations. Journal of Change Management, 3 (4), 319.

PAGE 98

98 Zapata Phelan, C. P. (2008). Managerial motivation for justice rule adherence [electronic resource] : Using self determination theory as a framework. Gainesville, Fla.: University of Florida. Retrieved from Full text: http://purl.fcla.edu/fcla/etd/UFE0022387

PAGE 99

99 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Micah David Scanga was born in Harare, Zimbabwe, Africa. During his adolesce nt years, he lived on four different continents, and eventually moving to Florida after surviving the Great Hanshin earthquake of 1995 and relocating to Dade City, Florida. Mr. Scanga was very active in middle school and high school in academics and extra curricular activities. He was accepted in the University of Florida and began his Gainesville, Fl. After four years, Mr. Scanga graduated cum laude with his Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Education and Communication, specializing in communication and leadership development and minoring in leadership. Following graduation he decid ed to continue his education, pursu ing his Master of Science in Agricultural Education an d Communication, with a n emphasis in leadership development and a minor in food and resource economics. Mr. Scanga plans to pursue a career related to the agricultural industry.