<%BANNER%>

The Major Barriers and Influences to Minority Recruitment and Retention in Natural Resource Occupations

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
The Major Barriers and Influences to Minority Recruitment and Retention in Natural Resource Occupations
Physical Description:
1 online resource (101 p.)
Language:
english
Creator:
Morgan, Tabitha
Publisher:
University of Florida
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date:

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( M.S.)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Committee Chair:
Ross, James Perran
Committee Members:
Monroe, Martha Carrie
Jacobson, Susan
Tooke, Tony L

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
barriers -- influences -- minority -- recruitment -- survey
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre:
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract:
The percentage of minoritieshas increased in the United States,  but the proportion of minority individuals employed in naturalresource occupations do not reflect the proportion ofminorities in the population. Therefore, natural resource agencies are attemptingto increase numbersof minorities in their workforce.  This study used the Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) as a framework to determine barriers and influencesof minority recruitment and retention. The SCCT states thatbehavior is a function of belief systems and conditions of an individual’senvironment.  I distributed an internet survey to 5,070 state naturalresource employees and received 3,080 completedsurveys (60.7%response).  Respondents were employees of the fourparticipating natural resource agencies: California Department of Forestry andFire Protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, New York State Departmentof Environmental Conservation, and Florida Fish and Wildlife ConservationCommission.  Minority respondents,compared to majority respondents,reported they were less likely to feel support from their parents whenpursuing natural resource careers, weremore likely to perceive barriers from natural resource agencies, andwere more likely to have a minority role model. In addition, respondents whogrew up in rural residences were more likely to hunt, wildlife watch, hike, andcamp than their suburban and urban counterparts. Respondents who grew up inurban residences are more likely to experience lack of exposure to naturalresources, lack of role models, and a lack of marketing by natural resourceagencies. From the results of this research, I recommend increasing agency outreach in urban areas,including minority families, and focusing on established recreationalactivities. These measures would improve recruitment of minorities. Thisstudy increases understanding of the barriers to theirparticipation in natural resource occupations.
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 Tabitha Morgan.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2013.
Local:
Adviser: Ross, James Perran.

Record Information

Source Institution:
UFRGP
Rights Management:
Applicable rights reserved.
Classification:
lcc - LD1780 2013
System ID:
UFE0045975:00001

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
The Major Barriers and Influences to Minority Recruitment and Retention in Natural Resource Occupations
Physical Description:
1 online resource (101 p.)
Language:
english
Creator:
Morgan, Tabitha
Publisher:
University of Florida
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date:

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( M.S.)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Committee Chair:
Ross, James Perran
Committee Members:
Monroe, Martha Carrie
Jacobson, Susan
Tooke, Tony L

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
barriers -- influences -- minority -- recruitment -- survey
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre:
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract:
The percentage of minoritieshas increased in the United States,  but the proportion of minority individuals employed in naturalresource occupations do not reflect the proportion ofminorities in the population. Therefore, natural resource agencies are attemptingto increase numbersof minorities in their workforce.  This study used the Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) as a framework to determine barriers and influencesof minority recruitment and retention. The SCCT states thatbehavior is a function of belief systems and conditions of an individual’senvironment.  I distributed an internet survey to 5,070 state naturalresource employees and received 3,080 completedsurveys (60.7%response).  Respondents were employees of the fourparticipating natural resource agencies: California Department of Forestry andFire Protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, New York State Departmentof Environmental Conservation, and Florida Fish and Wildlife ConservationCommission.  Minority respondents,compared to majority respondents,reported they were less likely to feel support from their parents whenpursuing natural resource careers, weremore likely to perceive barriers from natural resource agencies, andwere more likely to have a minority role model. In addition, respondents whogrew up in rural residences were more likely to hunt, wildlife watch, hike, andcamp than their suburban and urban counterparts. Respondents who grew up inurban residences are more likely to experience lack of exposure to naturalresources, lack of role models, and a lack of marketing by natural resourceagencies. From the results of this research, I recommend increasing agency outreach in urban areas,including minority families, and focusing on established recreationalactivities. These measures would improve recruitment of minorities. Thisstudy increases understanding of the barriers to theirparticipation in natural resource occupations.
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 Tabitha Morgan.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2013.
Local:
Adviser: Ross, James Perran.

Record Information

Source Institution:
UFRGP
Rights Management:
Applicable rights reserved.
Classification:
lcc - LD1780 2013
System ID:
UFE0045975:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 THE MAJOR BARRIERS AND INFLUENCES TO MINORITY RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION IN NATURAL RESOURCE OCCUPATION S By TABITHA C. MORGAN 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 20 13

PAGE 2

2 201 3 Tabitha C. Morgan

PAGE 3

3 To my Mom and Dad who encourag ed me every step of the way

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would first like to thank my advisor and committee chair, Dr. Perran Ross, for accepting me into his lab and supporting as I worked th rough this interesting project I would also like to thank my committee members, Dr. Martha Monroe and Dr. Susan Jacobson of the University of Florida, and Mr. Tony Tooke of the USDA Forest Service for their support and for providing invaluable input to my m degree project. I am very grateful to the employees of the California Department of Califor nia Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission for participating in my study and providing me with great re sults I would like to thank all of the faculty, staff, and fellow graduate students that have made my time at the University of Florida the most interesting years of my academic career. Finally, I give my greatest thanks to my family who supported and t olerated me as I carried on about how to analyze my survey results.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................ ................................ ............................... 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 7 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 8 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................ ................................ ............................. 9 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND SIGNIFICANCE ................................ ................................ 12 Minorities in Natural Resource Careers ................................ ................................ .. 12 The Social Cognitive Career Theory ................................ ................................ ....... 15 Existing Hypotheses of Barriers to Minorities in Natural Resources ....................... 17 Lack of Natural Resource Exposure ................................ ................................ 18 Limited Interest in Natural Resources as a Career Choice ............................... 19 Reduced High School Graduation Rates ................................ .......................... 19 Lack of Role Models/Mentors ................................ ................................ ........... 20 Objectives of t his Study ................................ ................................ .......................... 20 2 METHODS ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 25 Survey Preparation Process ................................ ................................ ................... 25 Survey Construction and Distribution ................................ ................................ ...... 27 Survey Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 28 Privacy Protection ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 29 Survey Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 29 3 RESULTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 30 Examination of Research Questions ................................ ................................ ....... 30 What are the D emographics of My S urvey R espondents? (Table 3 1) ............ 30 What E ndogenous B arriers are R eported by R espondents? ............................ 32 What E xogenous B arriers are R eported by R espondents? .............................. 32 D id N atural R esource E xposure A ffect areer C hoice? ............ 34 Was the P resence of R ole M odels influential to R N atural R esource C areers? ................................ ................................ ........... 35 Is there a R elationship b etween R C hildhood R esidence and I nterest in N atural R esource C areers? ................................ .......................... 37 Effects of the Childhood Residence ................................ ................................ ........ 38 Recreation ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 38 Barriers ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 39

PAGE 6

6 Overall ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 40 4 DISCUSSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 54 Overall Findings ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 54 Natural Resources and Culture ................................ ................................ ............... 58 APPENDIX A REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES ................................ ................................ ..... 61 B IRB APPROVAL ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 66 C PRELIMINARY INTERVIEW QUESTIONS ................................ ............................. 67 Preliminary Interview Questions ................................ ................................ ............. 67 Pilot Survey Interview Questions ................................ ................................ ............ 67 D SURVEY ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 68 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................... 93 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 101

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF TABLES Table .. page 3 1 Demographics of survey respondents. ................................ ............................... 41 3 2 C omparison of support given from others in regard to pursuing a career in natural resources for majority versus minority respondents at a significance level ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 42 3 3 C omparison of perceived barriers for majority versus minority respondents at ................................ ................................ ................ 43 3 4 C omparison between majority and minority natural resource based ................................ ........... 44 3 5 C omparison of the Influences of others on for majority versus minority (Wilcoxon Non Parametric Test) . ... 45 3 6 C omparison of the presence of a single influential individual for majority versus minority respondents ............................... 46 3 7 C omparisons between living location and natural resource recreation that showed significant significant differences shown by value ................................ ............................ 46 3 8 C omparisons between living location and exogenous barriers that showed differences shown by value. ................................ ................................ ............ 47 A 1 Scientific articles that were reviewed for this study. ................................ ............ 61

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1 1 Racial/Ethnic Demographics of the United States as of 2010 (Census 2011) ... 22 1 2 Projected Racial Make Up of the United States (Census Bureau 2004). ........... 22 1 3 The Social Cognitive Career Theory as described by Lent et al. (1994) incorporating the variables used in my study.. ................................ .................... 23 1 4 Study sites included natural resource agencies in Florida, Texas, California and New York.. ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 24 3 1 The c omparison of gender demographic between FWC respondents and FWC EEO report The differences are not significant at (Chi Square Test) ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 48 3 2 Comparison of reported o ccupation s between FWC Respondents and FWC EEO Report Only the proportion repor ting as General Biological Science is significant (Chi Square Test) ................................ .................. 49 3 3 C hildhood socioeconomic status of majo rity respondents and minority respondents ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 49 3 4 M edian levels of support given by various individuals to majority and minority respondents in regard to pursuing a natural resource career. ............................ 50 3 5 M edian levels of influence to join a natural resource career giv en to majority respondents and minority respondents by various individuals. ........................... 50 3 6 M edian s core of exogenous barriers faced by majority respondents and minority respondents in their profession. ................................ ............................ 51 3 7 M ajority and minority respondent natural resource recreati onal frequency. ....... 51 3 8 Life period in which majority r espondents and minority respondents decided to join a natural resource career ................................ ................................ ........ 52 3 9 Comparison of the race/ethnicity of influential individuals for majority versus minority respondents at a significance (Chi Square Test) ............. 52 3 10 C hildhood residence of majority respondents and minority respondents. ........... 53 3 11 Comparison of childhood residence for majority versus minority respondents (Chi Square Test) ................................ ............... 53

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AIBS American Institute of Biological Sciences ANOVA Analysis of Variance BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics CALFIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection DOI United Stated Department of Interior EEO Equal Employment Opportunity ESA Ecological Society of America FTE Full time Employee FWC Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission IRB Institutional Review Board NCES National Center for Education Statistics NYSDEC New York State Department of Environmental Conservation OPM Office of Personnel Management OTS Organization for Tropical Studies PCA Principal Component Analysis SCCT Social Cognitive Career Theory SEEDS Strategies for Ecology Education, Development, and Sustainability TPWD Texas Parks and Wildlife Department TWS The W i ldlife S o ciety UF University of Florida USDA United Stated Department of Agriculture

PAGE 10

10 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 Science THE MAJOR BARRIERS AND INFLUENCES TO MINORITY RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION IN NATURAL RESOURCE OCCUPATION S By Tabitha C. Morgan August 2013 Chair: James Perran Ross Major: Wildlife Ecology and Conservation T he p ercentage of minori ties has increased in the United States, but the proportion of minority individuals employed in natural resource occupations do not reflect the proportion of minorities in the population Therefore, n atural resource agencie s are attempt ing to increase number s of minorities in their workforce This s tudy used the Social Cognitive Career Theory (S CCT) as a framework to determine barriers and influences of minorit y recruitment and retention. The SCCT states that behavior is a function of belie f environment. I distributed an internet survey to 5,070 state natural resource employees and received 3,080 completed surveys ( 60.7% response) R espondents were employees of the four participating natural resource agencies: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, N ew York State Departmen t of Environmental Conservation and Florida Fish and W ildlife Conservation Commission Minority respondents c ompared to majority respondents r eported they were less likely to feel support from their parents when pursuing natural resource careers were

PAGE 11

11 more likely to perceiv e barriers from natural resource agencies, and were more likely to have a minority role model. In addition, respondents who grew up in rural residences were more likely to hunt, wildlife watch, hike, and camp t han their suburban and urban counterparts. Respondents who grew up in urban residences are more likely to experience lack of exposure to natural resources, lack of role models, and a lack of marketing by natural resource agencies. From the results of this research, I recommend increasing agency outreach in urban areas, including minority families, and focusing on established recreation al activities. These measures would improve recruitment of minorities. This study increases understanding of the barriers to their p articipation in natural resource occupations

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND SIGNIFICANCE Federal and state natural resource agencies are exploring how to increase the diversity within their work force (Wyche and Frierson 1990, Valdez 1995, Maughan et al. 2001, Moss 2011). Although the percentage of minority people in the United States is increasing, the number of minorities in natural resource occupations does not reflect this changing ratio ( Adams & Moreno 1998; Blockstein 1990; Blockstein et al. 1992; Holland et al. 1992; Lawrence et al. 1993a, 1993b; Weintraub et al. 2011 ). Much research has been done that reports the differences in these numbers ( Hodgdon 1980, 1982, 1990; Claussen & Fabbrizzio 1992; White 1992; Jones 1993; Ponds 1993; Adams & Moreno 1998 ) For my study, I have enlisted the help of state natural resource employees to complete a survey which tests existing psychological theories and hypotheses regarding factors that influence the diversity at natural resource agencies. From this, I have provided the results of the survey along with recommendations on how natural resource agencies can alter their approach and improve minority recruitment efforts. For this project all racial and ethnic minorities in the United States; spec ifically African Americans, Hispanics/Latinos, Asians, American Indians, and Pacific Islanders will be referred to together as collective occur in the US population in smaller numbers than White or Caucasian Americans, ethnic group at the present time (Figure 1 1). Minorities in Natural Resource Careers Natural resource administrators in a multitude of agencies have launched initiatives to recruit minorities and diversify their professions and associations (SWOP 1990, Baker 2000; Davis et al. 2002; Hudson 2001; Jenkins 2003; Taylor 2007). In the

PAGE 13

13 early years of these recruitment initia tives, researchers hypothesized that minorities were less likely to be interested in environmental concerns because they were so preoccupied with meeting basic needs in their daily lives (Van Ardsol et al. 1 965; Morrison et al. 1972; Meeker et al. 1973; Va n Liere & Dunlap 1980 ; Taylor 2007 ). Because natural resource agencies are supposed to reflect the needs of, and communicate effectively with the public, the lack of ethnic representation in the workforce is a major concern for natural res ource managers ( Maughan et al. 2001 ; Davis et al. 2002). The Census Bureau (2008) reported that the United States will be composed mostly of minority population individuals by 2042 (Figure 1 2). A s of May 2012, the Census Bureau reported that 50.4% of the children young er than age one are minorities. Minority r ecruitment programs used by agencies to appeal to different minority groups we re also running into difficulties with reaching goals of minority recruitment and retention (Mas sey 1992 ; Sims 1992 ). In addition th e public i n their role as stakeholders, is increasingly being asked to participate in decisions made about natural resource utilization and conservation (Decker et al. 1996) As the proportion of Caucasians in America decreases natural resource managers wonder how their policies and effectiveness will be a ffected. If ethnic minorities are not supportive of natural resource conservation, there might be negative impacts as their democratic power increases with population (Vaske et al. 2001). The lack of minority participation in natural resource careers is a well documented issue in the field of human dimensions Adams and Moreno (1998) conducted research with minority natural resource employees in the southeastern

PAGE 14

14 United States to explain career choice They found that the differences between minority and majority groups in natural resource occupations could be explained by previous exper ience in natural resources natural resource career salary and recruitment. Leatherberry and Wellman (19 8 8) using an unpublished survey done by the Department of Forestry at Virginia Tech (VT) in 1985, investigated the perception held by African American high school students about forestry professions. The purpose of the survey was to deter mine perspectives and experiences of minority and majority individuals in life natural science related majors. Leathe r berry and Wellman found that past exposure to the manual labor side of forestry plus a lack of educational opportunities created a n egative perception of forestry According to their results, the African American students surveyed relied very much on their parents and school resources t eachers, guidance systems, and counselors w hen they selected their intended college majors. In fact, they placed significantly more reliance on them than their surv eyed non minority counterparts. Additionally the African American students were not able to effectively identify the role of a professional forester. A large percentage of the students iden tified professional foresters as those that operated sawmil ls and cut down trees. They were largely unaware of positions which utilized skills and training obtained from majors such as the social sciences, math, business, computer science, econ omics, or c hemical engineering. A majority (71% ) of the students from both the minority and non minority groups had no opinion on whether foresters were poorly paid or not.

PAGE 15

15 Leatherberry and Wellman (19 8 8) came to an interesting conclusion that many students, from b oth the minority and non minority groups were not well informed about opportunities available to them in the field of forestry. Eight percent of students felt they were somewhat informed about the opportunities, while only one percent stated they were wel l informed. The other 91 percent of students felt they had little to no information on what a job in the field of forestry entailed. Eighty three percent of students who had information about forestry careers received their information mainly via youth g roups and television programs. Leatherberry and Wellman also hypothesized that the image of forestry as a manual occupation among the African American sample of students stems from the African American historical association with the "lower end of forestr y." These students might not think such arduous work is a realistic career goal for a college graduate. The Social Cognitive Career Theory In 1994, Lent proposed the Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) (Lent et al. 1994) This theory, based on the alre ady existing Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura 1986) focuses on psychological variables and how they environment to shape career aspirations. In this theory, the psychological variables are outcome expectancy, goals, and self effi cacy (Lent et al. 2000). Self efficacy is defined and reach goals (Ormrod 2006). environment on barriers to joining cert ain career fields (Albert & Luzzo 1999; Swanson et al. 1996; Swanson & Woitke 1997). The SCCT looks at two different aspects of an nment: endogenous and exogenous In other words, factual points of

PAGE 16

16 perceived family support) (Vondracek et al. 198 6). Endogenous barriers such as education level, life and act as barriers to their career growth in any career path Exogenous barriers such as perceived support from loved ones, are challenges in r eaching academic and/or career goals that are anticipated by an individual (Howard et al. 2010). These perceived barriers can cause the path to a certain career seem more difficult In research done by Jackson ( Jackson et al. 2006), urban youth from low income and racial/ethnic minority backgrounds who anticipated more of these perceived barriers had lower educational and career aspirations. In previous studies, self efficacy and other social cognitive variables (e.g. ethnicity, support, barriers) have be en good indicators of whether or not a college student is recruited and r etained in a science related career (Hackett et al. 1992; Schaefers et al.1997; Nauta et al. 1998; Quimby et al. 2007). Due to the succ ess of the use of this theory I will be applyi ng portions of the SCCT that coincide with existing hypotheses on minorities in natural resource careers which will be covered later in this chapter al sections of the SCCT that will be use d in this study are detailed below (Figure 1 3): 1. Background Objective and Perceived Barriers: These are not directly related to the career but still have an effect on career choice (e.g. socioeconomic status) ; 2. Proximal Objective and Perceived Barriers: These are barriers that are directly related to the career (e.g. perceived discrimination) ; 3. Self efficacy : This can be tested by looking at one of the sources of self efficacy called social models (i.e. role models) (Bandura 19 7 7) ; and 4. Learning Experiences previous exposure to natural resources

PAGE 17

17 By asking question s in regard to these variables, I will determine if the SCCT is a good guideline for the issue of minority recruitment and provide recommendations on how natural resource agencies can alter their efforts for higher recruitment and retention in minority populations. Existing Hypotheses of Barriers to Minorities in Natural Resources In 2007 the Organization for Tropical Studies (OTS ), a consortium of over 60 universities, released a manual of best practices that highlighted steps organizations and institutions could take in order to increase the number of trained ecologists and environmental scientists in their ranks. The manual als o examined already existing programs that have been successful in recruiting and retaining minorities in environmental fields. For those in the ages from kindergarten to their senior year in high school lack of natural resource exposure, limited interest in science as a career choice, and reduced high school graduation rates compared to their non minority counterparts were listed as the largest barriers to minorities joining natural resource careers. For high school graduates a lack of role models/mento rs, lack of hands on experiences, and a lack of international experiences were listed as the strongest barriers (OTS 2007) I will be exploring some of these hypotheses as variables in my study especially those that could possibly be directly affected by natural resource a gency efforts The se alterable variables along with the psychological variables given by the SCCT will be dependent variables in my study to identify and provide recommendations to natural resource agencies appeal more to the minori ty population in the United States.

PAGE 18

18 Lack of Natural Resource Exposure Historically, minority students are more likely to gain their first exposure to natural resources and science in general late in their high school careers and while going into college. As many students choose their career paths before this time ; early exposure is a key component of recruitment into a discipline (Berryman 1983; Chawla 1998; OTS 2007). Super (1980), Gottfredson (1981), and Hartung ( Hartung et al. 2005) have also found tha t early exposure is a key element; though they suggest it must be combined with famil ial influences to create a complete influence on career choice. An overall lack of n atural resource exposure among Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature Deficit Disorder Due to the large migration from rural to urban communities fewer children have had an innate connection with nature and more have a fear of this unfamiliar environment (Migliarese 200 8). With minorities accounting for 98% of urban population growth in the past decade, their living environments could provide a future barrier to minority recruitment and retention in the natural resources (Frey 2011). As someone who has grown up in a su burban environment with little rural exposure, I am especially interested in how the childhood living environments of participants has affected their outlook on the variables that will be presented to them. For the remainder of this study, the locations where individuals lived as children are e I did not inquire about current residenc e Because of th e supposed e ffect of residence on natural resource exposure I will also be exploring the residence of respondents as an inde pendent variable in which to test against the dependent variables created from the SCCT and these existing hypotheses of barriers to minorities in natural resources.

PAGE 19

19 Limited Interest in N atural R esources as a C areer Choice A lack of knowledge of the opportunities in the field is another reason for the limited minority interest in natural resources as a career choice (Chen et al. 1989 ; Wyche & Frierson 1990 ; Massey 19 92). One way to overcome this issue is introducing more nat ural resources related classes at the high school level (Weintraub et al. 2011). One strong hypothesis to lack of minority interest lies in the historical ties between mi norities and natural resources. Many minority groups have experienced structural racism in terms of environmental injustice (e.g. decreased water quality and landfills in minority areas) (Gee and Payne Sturges 2004, Bullard et al. 2007, Hoerner and Robinson 2008, Strife and Downey 2009) This has given some minority people distrust an d a negative view of the institution of natural resource management as well as the de cis ion makers in the field (Bryant 1995). Another reason could be that minorities are more attracted to higher paying science disciplines as they tend to make less overal l (Staniec 2004). Reduc ed High School Graduation Rates In 1997 the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) report ed the non minority dropout rate in the United States to be less than 8% while African American and Hispanic dropout rates were 12% an d 30% respectively. These numbers decreased in more recent years with African American and Hispanic dropout rates being approxim ately 7 % and 14% respectively. Non minority dropout rates fell to 5% (NCES 2012b). The lower minority high school graduation rates have been an important barrier to minorities in natural resources, especially when the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) lists the natural resource workforce (except technicians) with less than a high school diploma as being less than 1% (BLS 2012). A majority of natural resource professionals

PAGE 20

20 While over 39% of non minority Hispanic bachelor degree holders are lower at 20% and 23% respectively (NCES 2012a). Lack of Role Models/Mentors Mentorship has been shown to be important in various disciplines (Roche 1979, Bogat and Rednar 1985, Wyche and Frierson 1990, Welch 1997, Brown 2000, Maton et al. 2000, Maughan et al 2001, Armstrong et al. 2007). Mentoring is defined as significant career experience provided from one individual to a less experienced individuals during a transitional period in life (Haring 1997, 1999). Mentorship is also an important part of perceiv ed self efficacy, a vital part of the SCCT (Schwarzer 1992; Lent et al. 1994; Bandura, 1995; Maddux 1995; Bandura 1997; Pajares & Urdan 2006). This study will expand on the reviewed literature ( Appendix A ) along with th e hypothesis proposed using the SCCT, to question a large sample of individuals about the barriers and influences they experienced to participat ion in natural resource careers. Objectives of t his Study The purpose of this study is to (1) determine the influences to employment by state n atural resource management agencies, ( 2 ) determine minority specific and majority specific influences to employment by state natural resource management agency, and ( 3 ) determine the effect of location of childhood residenc e on an urce recreational background and barrier perceptions.

PAGE 21

21 Research q uestions : M y survey will address these objectives by ans wering these specific questions (Figure 1 4 ): 1. What are the demogra phics of our survey respondents ? 2. What endogenous barriers are reported by respondents ? 3. What exogenous barriers are reported by respondents ? 4. D id natural resource exposure affect career choice ? 5. est in natural resource careers ? 6. childhood residence and interest in natural resource careers ? 7. How do survey responses compare between majority and minority respondents?

PAGE 22

22 Figure 1 1 Racial/Ethnic Demographics of the United States as of 2010 (Census 2011) Figure 1 2 Projected Racial Make Up of the United States (Census Bureau 2004). 63.7% 16.4% 12.2% 4.7% 0.2% 0.7% 1.9% White/Caucasian Hispanic/Latino Black/African American Asian Naitve Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Native American/Alaskan Native Two or More Races 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Black Asian Other Hispanic White

PAGE 23

23 Figure 1 3 The So ci al Cognitive Career Theory incorporating the variables used in my study Boxes which contain independent variables for my study are outlined in square dots Boxes which contain dependent variables used in my study are outline d in round dots A d a p t e d f r o m Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., and Hackett, G. 1994. Toward a unifying soci al cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance [Monograph]. Journal of Vocational Behavior 45:79 122.

PAGE 24

24 Figure 1 4 Study sites include d natural resource agencies in Florida, Texas, California and New York. States included in the survey are shaded.

PAGE 25

25 CHAPTER 2 METHODS This chapter discusses the research design of this study and identifies the methods of dat a collection and survey analysis The goal of this thesis is to investigate what life events have brought individuals into the field of natural resources using theme s introduced by previously published psychological works and ideas Special attention has been given to how minority groups respond to barriers and influences in regard to their natural resource career. This goal is completed through use of a survey Sa lant and Dillman (1994) state that surveys can be used to assess needs, evaluate demand, and examine impact The survey was designed to provide data to determine perceived and objective barriers, levels of natural resource exposure, social models of self efficacy, and the e ffects of the residence on their decision to join a natural resource career. The survey and a ll interviews procedures were approved by the UF Institutional Review Board (IRB) Protocol #U 719 2012 (Appendix B ) All agencies that participated in this study agreed to participate in the study. For preliminary in person interviews, verbal consent was obtained from the participant before interviewing began For the main sample, participants were given an explanation of the research and procedures on the first page of the internet survey If they opted not to participate in the survey, they were given the option of exiting the survey. Survey Preparation Process I looked at the questions and results of the previously published works along with Lent et al. 1994) SCCT in order to draft questions that could be used in preliminary structured interviews For the interview process, 10 face to face interviews

PAGE 26

26 were scheduled with natural resource profession als in the Gainesville, Florida and Tallahassee, Florida Each individual was asked a series of 10 questions with concurrent verbal probing. Each interview lasted approximately one hour From the results of each interview I drafted questions for use in the survey to be used with our target population After the survey was drafted, I pretested the survey by holding think aloud interviews with two members of the target population on the University of Florida campus. To choose the individuals to survey for this thesis, I first targeted the states that have the largest population : California, Texas, Florida and New York because they have 1 ) contain large metropolitan and rural regions, and 2 According to the Census Bureau (2012), the term minority majority is used to denote a region or state in which the minority population in aggregate outnumber s that of non Hispanic Whites. The two minority majority states in this study sample are California and Texas This was a n important study group for the survey as a large number of ethnic minority respondents is needed in order to make a statistically sound analysis of minority group responses I initially intended to include federal natural resource agencies in the study; however, due to strict Office of Personnel Management (OPM) regulations, I would have not been able to gain approval and complete the survey collection in a timely manner I contacted the state natural resource agencies in each of those states, and used all of those who responded : California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE) : CALFIRE acts owned forests. Their mission

PAGE 27

27 Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) : TPWD focuses on conserving these lands for use by the public and conserve the resources for future generations. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYDEC) : NYDEC takes responsibility for the management of plant and animal populations in the state of New York. They also manage of forests and watersheds in the state. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) : The FWC engages in natural resource conservation via the four public responsibilities of law enforcement, research, management, and outreach The agency focuses on the management of fish and wildlife resources for multiple use by the public. Survey Construction and Distribution The survey was mainly quantitative in nature Open ended questions allowed respondents to elaborate on quantitative responses The survey was composed of questions obtained from published works, the preliminary survey and t he SCCT to answer the following research questions: 1. What are the demogra phics of our survey respondents ? 2. What endoge nous barriers are reported by respondents ? 3. What exogenous barrier s are reported by respondents ? 4. D id natural resourc e exposure affect respon career choice ? 5. resource careers ? 6. childhood residence and interest in natural resource careers ? 7. How do survey responses comp are between majority and minority respondents? Dillman et al. 2009) Surveys were distributed using the SurveyMonkey ( www.surveymonkey.com ) web based software

PAGE 28

28 A list of respondents was provided to me by each agency I asked for the list to only include individuals in natural resource professions, which excluded administrative assistants and maintenance staff The list provided me with the names and emails of the current full time emplo yees (FTEs) in each agency. Three days before the survey was distributed, directors of each participating agency sent my pre drafted introductory letter to their employees which explained the nature and timeline of the survey procedure. Survey links were then emailed directly to participants via their work email addresses Surveys were personalized so that no one could access the survey without the direct link presented in each email Survey submission was only counted once per respondent submission O nce a participant completed the last page of the survey, their link was deactivated and they could no longer access the survey Beginning one week after the first email contact, two reminder emails were sent out at one week intervals to all members of the target sample that had not yet submitted a survey. I distributed the survey to 5,070 total employees and received 3,080 responses for a response rate of 60.7%. Survey Analysis Quantitative items were analyzed using JMP 10 statistical system Qualitative responses were analyzed in SurveyMonkey using the built in text analysis to highlight common words Quantitative responses were analyzed using four different methods in JMP 10 Statistical Software: Likert type questions were analyzed using a Wilcoxon/ Kruskal Wallis Test; Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was utilized in quantitative questions with eith er a

PAGE 29

29 Chi square test was use d for multiple choice questions; and Childhood r esidenc e multiple comparisons were analyzed using a Steel Dwass Test. Privacy Protection I took special care to ensure the confidentiality of survey participants Code identifiers were substituted for each respondent email address when surveys were collected Onl y I can reconnect these codes to any particular respondent. Before any information was taken, participants were presented with an informed consent form that was approved by the University of Florida ( UF) IRB Protocol #U 719 2012 Survey Limitations O ne l imitation to this study was that federal employees could not be included without a lengthy approval process Since the main survey was online, additional probing to quantitative and qualitative question was not possible Another limitation was collapsing of all major United States minority groups (i.e. African Americans, Hispanics/Latinos, Asians, American Indians/Native Alaskans, and Pacific Islanders/Native Hawaiians) into one umbrella group It would have been beneficial to have enough participants o f each cultural background to view each ethnic/racial group separately ; however, minority respondent numbers were not at a level that would have made that type of analysis statistically sound.

PAGE 30

30 CHAPTER 3 RESULTS All respondents (n=3080) were employees of the four participating natural resource agencies: CALFIRE, TPWD, NYDEC, and FWC. Group comparisons refer to the comparison of responses between majority and minority respondents Likert scale responses were analyzed via a Wilcoxon/Krus kal Wallis Test Multiple choice items were ana lyzed using chi square tests A significance level of of variables In the Group Comparisons section, only categories from which a significant diffe rence between majority and minority responses are reported. Examination of Research Questions What are the D emographics of M y S urvey R espondents? (Table 3 1) Age: A majority (82%) of the respondents were from ages 22 to 54 There was no significant diffe rence between age groups 22 to 34 (n=747) 35 to 44 (n=814) and 45 to 54 (n=811) (p<0.05) The age demographics of the survey respondents did not significantly differ from that of the US Labor Force as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics ( BLS 2013 ). Gender: In the total sample 7 5.5 % of respondents were male while 2 4.5 % of respondents were female In order to determine whether a gender was over or underrepresented in my respondents I compared the proportion of men and women FWC respondents (74%, 26%) to the proportion of men and women in the FWC Equal Empl oyment Opportunity (EEO) Report (82%, 18%) The difference in the proportion of females in FWC respondents and FWC EEO are not significantly different (p<0.05) (Figure 3 1). All three samples show a large divergence from the expected ratio of

PAGE 31

31 app roximately 50% male and female. This confirms that women are underrepresented in these agency samples. Race/ e thnicity: Our respondents were 85.9% Caucasian and 14.1% minority Our minority sample con sisted of mostly individuals of Hispanic/Latino Origin (5.9%), two or more races (2.8%), other (2.3%), Black/African American (1.6%), and less than 1.0% of Native American/Alaskan Natives, Asians, and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders. Occupation: Most of respondents in our total sample (56%) consisted of law enforcement officers and wildlife biologist/ fisheries specialists I compared the occupations of the FWC respondents to the FWC EEO Report in order to determine if an occupation was over or underrepr esented in my sample In both the sample of all respondents and FWC respondents General Biological Sciences (1%) w as significantly underrepresented compared to the FWC EEO report (11%) (p<0.05) (Figure 3 2) Some occupations did not appear among the FWC respondents (i.e. business, information technology management, and recreational specialist) This could be a result of chance and sampling On the other hand, this survey was presented in a way that would appeal to individuals who were strictly natural res ource professionals This may have deterred individuals who did not self identify as a natural resource professional even though they work in a natural resource agency. Overall the distribution of occupations was comparable between the FWC EEO report, FW C respondents and the total sample, suggesting our data represents a reasonable cross section of natural resource agency occupations.

PAGE 32

32 What E ndogenous B arriers are R eported by R espondents? Each respondent was asked to classify their childhood socioeconomic status as working class, working middle class, middle class, upper middle class, or upper class Responses formed a non normal distribution; therefore median values were used for the analysis Both majority and minority respondents had similar childhood socioeconomic statuses Therefore, there was no significant difference between majority and minority responses (p<0.01). Education is usually considered an important endogenous barrier Howe ver, as I surveyed only natural resource employees in professional positions, it was assumed that E ndogenous barriers were not deemed to be an important factor in our respondents. Responses: Mos t respondents majority (93%) and minority (93%), considered their childhood socioeconomic status to range from the working to middle class (Figure 3 3 ). What E xogenous B arriers are R eported by R espondents? Exogenous barriers were tested using a 7 point Likert scale Responses formed a non normal distribution. Median values more than or equal to 4.0 indicated that the event was participated in more frequently than expected by chance. Minorities were significantly more like ly to perceive negative barriers than majority respondents (p<0.01) Minorities were also less likely to feel support from their families. Family s upport and i nfluences : Majority and minority respondents were asked how supportive their family and friends were in regard to the respondent choosing a career in the natural resource profession Majority respondents stated that their father,

PAGE 33

33 mother, sibling, other family, and friends were all supportive of their decision to become a natural resource profession al However, siblings, other family, and friends were considered less supportive than parents (Figure 3 4 ) Minority respondents stated that their father, mother, sibling, other family, and friends were all supportive of their decision to become a natura l resource professional; however mothers, siblings, other family, and friends were considered less supportive than fathers (Figure 3 4). Respondents were also asked how influential various individuals were to them choosing a career in natural resources F athers, teachers, mothers, other family members and friends were all considered influential individuals for majority respondents; peers, siblings, neighbors, camp counselors, and school counselors were less influential (Figure 3 5 ). For minority responden ts fathers, teachers, mothers, and friends were all considered influential individuals. Other family members, Peers, siblings, neighbors, camp counselors, and school counselors were less influential (Figure 3 5). For both mi nority and majority respondents even in cases where mothers were considered to be key supporti ve and influential individuals mothers were considered to be less supportive and influential than father figures. Barriers: Respondents were asked to what degree they faced certain barriers, ba sed on barriers listed by Chesney (1981) Majority respondents stated that low job availability and low salary were important barriers that they have experienced in the natural resource profession (Figure 3 6 ). Minority respondents stated that low job ava ilability was an important barrier that they have experienced in the natural resource profession (Figure 3 6). Minority respondents also found low salary to be a barrier in

PAGE 34

34 natural resources; however they felt less affected by this barrier that did majorit y respondents. Group c omparisons Family s upport: reported to be significantly less supportive of a job in natural resources than majority fathers and mothers (p<0.01) (Table 3 2). Barriers : (Table 3 3) Minority respondents felt that racial discrimination was a significantly stronger than majority respondents (p<.01) Minorities also felt less exposed to natural resources and the jobs available to them in the fiel d throughout their childhood (p<.01) Minorities were more likely to feel a lack of encouragement from those around them as well as natural resource agencies to jo in a career in natural resources (p<.01) Minorities also felt more that the culture of their family is against a career in natural resource s than majority respondents (p<.01) Minority respondents felt that a lack of role models and lack of marketing by natural resource agencies was a larger barrier than did majority respondents (p<.01) D id N atural R esource E xposure A ffect R C areer C hoice ? Natural resource exposure measured using a 7 point Likert scale Respondents were asked how frequently they participated in various natural resource related recreational activities during three stages in their lives kindergarten to 5 th grad e, 6 th grade through college, and in the past 3 years Because this section asked for natural resource recreation frequency throughout three different life stages, a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was utilized to check for variable redundancy There was a high correlation between responses of recreational frequency over all life stages for

PAGE 35

35 respondents; so, I used a mean of the responses as an overall value of recreational frequency. Responses formed a non normal distribution Median values more than or equal to 4.0 indicated that the event was participated in more frequently than expected by chance Minority respondents participated in natural resource based recreation less than majority respondents (p<.01) Recreation : Majority respondents partici pated more often in wildlife watching, fishing, and beach activities than expected by chance (Figure 3 7 ). Minority respondents participated more often in fishing than expected by chance (Figure 3 7 ). Group c omparisons Recreation: Out of the 12 recreational activities listed by us, minority respondents participated significantly less than majority respondents in hunting, visiting national parks, camping, canoeing/boating, and hiking (p<.01) (Table 3 4) Was the P resence of R ole M odels influenti al to R N atural R esource C areers? I considered natural resource role models to be any individual that influenced the respondent to pursue a natural resource career, including parents, family, teachers, and natural resource agency pro fessionals. Natural resource role model presence tested using multiple choice quantitative questions in regard to the presence of natural resource role models and agency the field of natural resources. M ajority r esponses Influential i ndividuals : Majority respondents were asked if there was an important individual who influenced them to pursue a career in natural resources

PAGE 36

36 Majority respondents were more likely to have an ethnic majority role model than a n ethni c minority role model who began influenc ing their appreciation of natural resources before elementary school Although influences began early, most respondents (68%) decided to go into a career in natural resources later in their academic careers (high school, college, or after college) (Figure 3 8 ). Fathers of respondents were considered to be the most influential individual Only 10% of respondents had parents who worked specifically in the natural resource field; still, 36% of individuals were influenced by their Agency e ncouragement: Most majority respondents (62%) had another occupational goal before pursuing a career in natural resources Natural resource agencies were perceived t o have encouraged 37% of respondents to pursue a career in natural resources; 69% of respondents stated that this encouragement took place later in their academic careers (after college, college, or high school) Only 9% of majority respondents recalled b eing encouraged by a natural resource agency to join a student program hosted by an agency, which generally occurred during college (67%). Minority r esponses Influential i ndividuals : Interestingly, Minority respondents were more likely to have an ethnic ma jority role model than an ethnic minority role model who influenc ed their appreciat ion of natural resources Like majority respondents, minority respondents began interacting with their natural resource role model before elementary school. Also like majority respondents most minority respondents (69%) decided to go into a career in natural resources later in their academic careers (after college, college, or high school) (Figure 3 8 ). Fathers of minority respondents were considered to be the most in fluential individual Only 7% of minority respondents had parents who worked

PAGE 37

37 specifically in the natural resource field; still, 35% of individuals were influenced by their Agency e ncouragement: Most minority respondents (69%) had another occupational goal before pursuing a career in natural resources Natural resource agencies were perceived to have encouraged 33% of respondents to pursue a career in natural resources; 80% of respondents stated that this encouragement took place later in their academic career (after college or college) Only 10% of minority respondents recalled being encouraged by a natural resource agency to join a student program hosted by an agency, much of which occurred dur ing college (70%). Group c omparisons F ather s were viewed as significantly less influential to minority respondents than fathers to majority respondents (p< 0 .01) (Table 3 5) Although individual categories of non family members did not significantly influ ence respondents, combined their influence is significant. This seems largely due to the influence of teachers (Figure 3 5). M inorities tended to be more influenced to join natural resource careers by individuals outside of their family than majority resp ondents by individuals outside of their families (p< 0 .01) (Table 3 5) Minority respondents had a significantly lower rate of having one particular individual that influenced them to start a career in natural resources than majority respondents (p< 0 .01) ( Table 3 6) Minority respondents were also significantly less likely to have a majority role model than majority respondents (p<.01) (Figure 3 9 ). Is there a R elationship b etween R C hildhood R esidence and I nterest in N atural R esource C areers ? Respondents were asked in what type of area they lived ranging from rural to urban (5 point Likert scale Appendix D Question 22) during three stages in their lives

PAGE 38

38 during primary school, during middle school, and during high school Because this section asked for natural resource recreation frequency throughout three different life stages, a PCA was utilized to check for variable redundancy. The performed PCA showed a high correlation between responses of residence over all life stages, therefore I used the mean of the responses as an overall value of recreational frequency. Responses: M ajority and minority respondents l ived in mostly rural or suburban settings (Figure 3 10). Group Comparison: Although most minority respondents lived in rural or suburban settings, m inority respondents were significantly more likely to live in mostly urban areas in all levels of their life than majority respondents (p<.01) (Figure 3 11). There were no significant differences in the number of respondents from either race group in regard to the other locations of living (p<.01) E ffects of the Childhood Residence Recreation R ecreational activities whose frequencies significantly changed with the are shown in Table 3 7 Because the frequency of each recreational activity increased with value on the Likert scale, a higher mean denotes a higher frequency of participating in a recreational activity. Hunting: Respondents from mostly rural living locations were more likely to hunt tha n respondents from any other living location (p<.01) Individuals from rural suburban areas hunted significantly less than those in mostly rural households but significantly more than those in suburban, suburban urban, and mostly urban households (p<.01) Wildlife w atching: Respondents from mostly rural living locations were more likely to participate in wildlife watching than those from suburban, suburban urban, and

PAGE 39

39 mostly urban living locations (p<.01) Those from rural suburban households participated in wildlife watching significantly more than th ose from mostly urban households (p<.01) Hiking: Individuals from mostly rural and rural suburban households participated in hiking significantly more than individuals from mostly urban households (p<.01) Ca mping: Individuals from mostly rural and rural suburban households were more likely to participate in camping more frequently than those from suburban a nd mostly urban living locations (p<.01) Barriers The perception of the intensity of some barriers cha nged significantly with 8. Because the intensity of each perceived barrier increased with value on the Likert scale, a higher me a n denotes a higher perceived intensity of said barr ier. Lack of e xposure to n atural r esources: Those who grew up in suburban urban, mostly urban, and suburban environments were more likely to report a lack of exposure to natural resources than those that grew up in mostly rural households (p<.01) Lack of r ole m odels: Respondents who grew up in mostly urban environments were more likely to perceive a lack of natural resource role models than respondents who grew up in mostly rural environments (p<.01) Lack of m arketing by n atural r esource a gencies: Those who grew up in mostly urban environments were more likely to feel that natural resource agencies lacked good marketing than those in mostly rural households (p<.01)

PAGE 40

40 Overall Individuals who grew up in rural residences were more likely to hunt, wildlife w atch, hike, and camp than their suburban and urban counterparts. Individuals who grew up in urban residences are more likely to experience lack of exposure to natural resources, lack of role models, and a lack of marketing by natural resource agencies.

PAGE 41

41 Table 3 1 Demographics of survey r espondents Demographic n Percentage Total Age 3080/5070 60.7% 22 to 34 747 25.5% 35 to 44 814 27.8% 45 t o 54 811 27.7% 55 to 64 515 17.6% 65 and Over 39 1.3% Gender Male 2205 75.5% Female 717 24.5% Race/Ethnicity White 2499 85.9% Hispanic/Latino 172 5.9% Black/African American 46 1.6% Asian 13 0.4% Native American or Alaska Native 23 0.8 % Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 8 0.3% Two or More Races 80 2.8% Other 67 2.3% Occupation Law Enforcement 857 28.1% Wildlife Biology/Fisheries Research 853 27.9% Other 466 15.3% Natural Resource Management 358 11.7% Forestry 201 6.6% Recreational Specialist 122 4.0% Business 119 3.9% Information Technology Management 39 1.3% General Biological Science 35 1.1% Soils Science 3 0.1%

PAGE 42

42 Table 3 2 C omparison of support given from others in regard to pursuing a career in natural resources for majority versus minority respondents at a significance Category Race Group Mean Rank Prob>|Z| Fathers Majority 1372.5 0.0001 Mothers Siblings Other Family Members Friends Minority Majority Minority Majority Minority Majority Minority Majority Minority 1187.8 1403.3 1232.2 1309.6 1277.4 1342.2 1262.2 1389.0 1320.4 0.0001* 0.4200 0.0495 0.0979 *Wilcoxon Non Parametric Test

PAGE 43

43 Table 3 3 C omparison of perceived barriers for majority versus minority respondents at Category Group Mean Rank Prob>|Z| Racial Discrimination Minority 1727.3 0.0001* Majority 1383.9 Lack of Exposure to Natural Resources Minority 1534.0 0.0001* Majority 1418.3 Lack of Encouragement to Join Natural Resource Agencies Minority 1535.8 0.0001* Majority 1414.6 Family Cultural Structure Minority 1544.6 0.000 1 Majority 1408.8 Lack of Role Models Minority 1555.8 0.0002* Majority 1408.0 Lack of Marketing Minority 1545.5 0.0007* Majority 1412.6 Proper Training Minority 1460.8 0.3908 Majority 1425.6 Negative Natural Resource Experiences Minority 1477.3 0.1236 Majority 1426.4 Low Expected Salary Majority 1439.4 0.2285 Minority 1386.4 Gender Discrimination Minority 1458.2 0.3518 Majority 1425.5 Job Availability Majority 1447.2 0.0254 Minority 1348.8 Poor Academic Preparation Minority 1499.1 0.0365 Majority 1418.8 *Wilcoxon Non Parametric Test

PAGE 44

44 Table 3 4 C omparison between majority and minority natural resource based Category Column1 Mean Rank Prob>|Z| Hunting Majority 1374.8 0.0069* Minority 1257.1 National Park Visitation Majority 1391.6 0.0082* Minority 1277.4 Camping Majority 1404.7 0.0013* Minority 1262.4 Canoeing/Boating Majority 1393.2 0.0001* Minority 1096.2 Hiking Majority 1379.5 0.0001* Minority 1167.7 Wildlife Watching Majority 1389.3 0.014 0 Minority 1281.2 Birdwatching Majority 1336.7 0.5947 Minority 1313.7 Fishing Majority 1425.0 0.1877 Minority 1366.2 Beach Activities Majority 1406.8 0.4313 Minority 1371.9 Mountain Biking Majority 1339.7 0.6933 Minority 1323.4 City Park Visitation Minority 1424.4 0.0483 Majority 1338.7 Picnicki ng Majority 1347.6 0.7895 Minority 1336.0 *Wilcoxon Non Parametric Test

PAGE 45

45 Table 3 5 C omparison of the Influences of others on for majority versus minority (Wilcoxon Non Parametric Test) Non family members combine the influences of friends, neighbors, teachers, camp counselors, school counselors, media, and school outings. Category Group Mean Rank Prob>|Z| Fathers Majority 999.5 0.0012* Minority 880.8 Non Family Members Minority 971.2 0.0001* Majority 956.7 Mother Majority 988.0 0.05 00 Minority 914.3 Siblings Minority 963.0 0.8741 Majority 957.3 Other Family Members Majority 973.9 0.2591 Minority 932.1 Friends Majority 973.8 0.8669 Minority 967.5 Neighbors Minority 977.4 0.5601 Majority 957.4 Teachers Majority 978.1 0.0912 Minority 914.8 Camp Counselor Minority 954.0 0.9741 Majority 952.9 School Counselor Minority 974.3 0.4813 Majority 952.3 Media Minority 1455.4 0.0294 Majority 1364.8 School Outings Minority 1367.3 0.933 0 Majority 1371.0

PAGE 46

46 Table 3 6 C omparison of the presence of a single influential individual for majority Group n Std(x) Std Error Prob>| F | Majority 2486 0.69 0.17 0.01243 0.0057* Minority 407 0.64 0.45 0.01244 *Analysis of Variance Test Table 3 7 C omparisons between living location and natural resource recreation that significant differences shown by value Category Level Std(x) Hunting Mostly Rural 2.62 A 1.77 Rural Suburban 2.01 B 1.71 Suburban 1.36 C 1.54 Suburban Urban 1.35 C 1.55 Mostly Urban 1.26 C 1.44 Wildlife Watching Mostly Rural 3.44 A 1.87 Rural Suburban 3.13 AB 1.72 Suburban 2.87 BC 1.7 0 Suburban Urban 2.75 BC 1.69 Mostly Urban 2.58 C 2.58 Hiking Mostly Rural 2.62 A 1.57 Rural Suburban 2.53 A 1.35 Suburban 2.41 AB 1.33 Suburban Urban 2.42 AB 2.42 Mostly Urban 2.16 B 2.16 Camping Mostly Rural 2.23 A 0.98 Rural Suburban 2.2 0 A 0.97 Suburban 2 .00 B 0.95 Suburban Urban 2.04 B 1 .00 Mostly Urban 1.92 B 1.02 *Steel Dwass Non Parametric Test

PAGE 47

47 Table 3 8 C omparisons between living location and exogenous barriers that showed differences shown by value. Category Level Std(x) Lack of Exposure Mostly Rural 2.39 A 1.82 Rural Suburban 2.55 A 1.77 Suburban 2.7 0 B 1.87 Suburban Urban 2.93 B 1.85 Mostly Urban 2.87 B 2.1 0 Lack of Role Model s Mostly Rural 1.84 A 1.51 Rural Suburban 2.03 B 1.5 0 Suburban 2.07 B 1.57 Suburban Urban 2.16 B 1.58 Mostly Urban 2.29 C 1.82 Lack of Marketing Mostly Rural 2.33 A 1.76 Rural Suburban 2.41 AB 1.72 Suburban 2.58 B 1.83 Suburban Urban 2.78 B 1.78 Mostly Urban 2.77 B 1.98 *Steel Dwass Non Parametric Test

PAGE 48

48 Figure 3 1 The c omparison of gender demographic between FWC respondents and FWC EEO report The differences are not significant at (Chi Square Test) 74% 26% 82% 18% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Male Female Percentage Gender FWC EEO Report FWC Respondents

PAGE 49

49 Figure 3 2 Comparison of reported o ccupation s between FWC Respondents and FWC EE O Report Only the proportion reporting as General Biological Science is significant (Chi Square Test) Figure 3 3 C hildhood socioeconomic s tatus of m ajority r espondents and m inority r espondents 10% 1%* 1% 2% 5% 10% 29% 42% 4% 11%* 11% 27% 47% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Other General Biological Science Recreational Specialist Information Technology Management Business Natural Resource Management Wildlife Biology/ Fisheries Research Law Enforcement Percentages Occupation FWC EEO Report FWC Respondents 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Working Class Lower middle Class Middle Class Upper middle Class Upper Class Percentage Socioeconomic Status Minority Respondents Majority Respondents

PAGE 50

50 Figure 3 4 M edian l evel s of support given by various individuals to m ajority and minority r espondents in regard to pursuing a natural resource c areer Figure 3 5 M edian level s of i nfluence to join a natural resource career given to majority respondents and minority respondents by various individuals 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 Father Mother Sibling Other Family Friends 7 Point Likert Score Individual Majority Respondents Minority Respondents 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7 Point Likert Scale Score Majority Minority

PAGE 51

51 Figure 3 6 M edian s core of exogenous barriers faced by majority respondents and minority respondents in their profession Figure 3 7 M ajority and m inority respondent natural resource r ecreational f requency 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 Proper Job Training Negative Experiences with Low Salary Racial Discrimination Gender Discrimination Lack of Exposure to Natural Low Job Availability Lack of Encouragement to Culture of the Home/Family Poor Academic Preperation Lack of Role Models Lack of Marketing by Natural 7 Point Likert Score Exogenous Barrier Minority Respondents Majority Respondents 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 7 Point Likert Score Natural Resource Recreational Activity Majority Respondents Minority Respondents

PAGE 52

52 Figure 3 8 Life period in which majority r espondents and minority respondents decided to join a natural resource c areer Figure 3 9 Comparison of the race/ethnicity of influential individuals for majority versus ( Chi Square Test ) 8% 9% 24% 16% 24% 20% 8% 8% 22% 15% 29% 18% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Elementary School Middle School High School After High School College After College Percentage of Respondents Life Period Minority Respondents Majority Respondents 57%* 43%* 4%* 96%* 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Minority Majority Percentage Race/Ethnicity of Influential Individual Minority Majority

PAGE 53

53 Figure 3 10 C hildhood residence of majority r espondents and minority r espondents Figure 3 11 Comparison of childhood residence for majority versus minority ( Chi Square Test ) 7% 9% 16% 32% 36% 8% 12% 21% 28% 31% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Suburban Urban Mostly Urban Rural Suburban Mostly Rural Suburban Minority Respondents Majority Respondents 32% 16% 36% 7% 9%* 28% 12% 31% 8% 21%* 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Percentage of Respondents Residency Majority Minority

PAGE 54

54 CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSION Overall Findings The purpose of this study was to better understand the influences and barriers to minority recruitment and retention in the field of natural resources This study determined that there exist differences in the influe nces and barriers not only between minority and majority respondents but also between people in different childhood residences R espondents who grew up in rural versus urban environments experienced varying levels of natural resource recreation and barriers in the field of natural resources. The research questions addressed the various inputs of the SCCT to determine if any or all were important to the natural resource professional respon dents and/or if the intensity of the inputs differed among minority and majority respondents or rural and urban respondents. Few e nd ogenous barrie rs were reported by respondents Education and socioeconomic status were the endogenous barriers included in t his study For professional positions diplomas are required. Therefore, I confidently assumed that a post high school education was obtained by all survey respondents Socioeconomic status w as, from both the majority and minority respondent groups, reported as a working to middle class environment This result coincides with other studies on the number of individuals in each socioeconomic class (Gilbert 2002, Beeghley 2004, Thompson and Hick ey 2005) Therefore based on my study and others, socioeconomic status itself does not appear to be a barrier when recruiting individuals into natural resource occupations.

PAGE 55

55 Significant exogenous barriers were reported by responden ts Although minority respondents felt that their family was generally supportive of their pursuing a natural resource career, minority parents were less supportive than majority I propose two hypotheses as to why this is the case. This could be due to the lack of emphasis on natural resource careers in minority cultures (Wondolleck and Yaffee 20 00 ). Due to this lack of emphasis, minority parents could be less knowledgeable about the career field and cannot provide a high level of support due to this assumed lack of knowledge. Perhaps minority parents were reported to be less supportive due to the same exogenous barriers that minority respondents reportedly experience while in the workforce. They could feel less exposed to the career and natural resources in general. In turn they are less supportive of their children entering the natural resource career field. In order to address this issue, I recommend that natural resource agencies include minority families when recruiting minority individuals Events in minority areas th at include family oriented activities could be used to improve the knowledge of natural resource occupations to individuals on a family level It is more important in these areas that natural resource agencies work to expose individuals to the importance of natural resources and especially the idea of the field as a viable occupation option Not only would an increase in these activities aim to overcome the barrier of parental support but also the barriers of l ack of natural resource occupation exposure, lack of encouragement, and lack of role models all of which were seen as significantly stronger barriers in minority respondents.

PAGE 56

56 I also recommend that natural resource agencies continue to go to areas of underrepresented groups and introduce the idea of a natural resource occupation to minority groups. As minority respondents mentioned family culture as a significantly stronger barrier than did majority respondents, minority respondents are not as like ly to get encouragement and exposure to natural resour ce occupations from their families. It is more important in these areas that natural resource agencies work to expose individuals to the importance of natural resources and especially the idea of the field as a viable occupation option. This initiative will also readily engage the three other exogenous barriers that minority respondents reportedly felt more strongly than majority respondents: lack of natural resource occupation exposure, lack of encouragement, and lack of role models. Rac ial discrimination although not a strong barrier overall was a si gnificantly stronger barriers to minority respondents than majority respondents Recent initiatives within natural resource agencies are currently being put in place to battle the perception of racial discrimination For instance, federal agencies such as the USDA Forest Service and National Park Service have started the Unconscious Bias Initiative and Diversity Change Agent Program respectively to alter the perception that natural resource agencies only appeal to exclusive individuals (For man 2011 Tidwell 2011 ) Agencies raising awareness of their diversity issues as well as being transparent with their efforts to change them can aid the view of racial discrimination within the workplace. Respondents reported having varying amounts of natural resource exposure Wildlife watching, fishing, and beach activities were the natural resource recreational

PAGE 57

57 activities participated in most frequently by both majority and minority respondents Mount ain biking and hunting were the least frequented activities for minority respondents while mountain biking, hunting, and canoeing/boating were the least frequented activities by majority respondents The activities majority respondents participated in si gnificantly more than minority respondents hunting, national park visitation, camping, canoeing/boating, and hiking did not seem to be important natural resource recreational activities for either respondent group ; it would be more beneficial to increase t he frequency of recreational activities that are important to a cultural group than it would be to introduce a recreational activity that a community has not yet adopted ( Hinch et al. 2005 Walker and Virden 2005, Hudson et al. 2013). From my results, I was unable to determine which, if a ny, type of natural resource recreation was crucial to influencing individuals to become interested in a natural resource career. What was clear, however, was that respondents participated in natural resource recreations through all stages of their youth. Therefore I recommend that natural resource agencies, when attempting to expose youth to natural resources, utilize available recreational activities. Not only will this remove some of the unfamili ar ity of the activity, but it also promotes continuity for the recreation to be repeated when the agency is not present. T he presence of role models was est in natural resource careers Role models were reported to be imp development in their natural resource career Most respondents in both majority respondents and minority respondent groups decided to join a natural resource profession in high school and beyond This suggests that natural resource agencies

PAGE 58

58 should especially target high school age and older students as that seems to be the age where most will decide their occupation goals Minority respondents, significantly more so than majority respondents, reported being more influenced by minor ity individuals outside the family To take advantage of this, natural resource agencies should actively provide minority role models from within the agencies to minority students. There exist s residence and survey responses Minority respondents, more so than majority respondents, were significantly more likely to live in mostly urban environments Individuals in urban environments were less likely to participate in hunting, wildlife watching, hiking, and camping In addition, individuals in urban environments were more likely to feel a lack of exposure to natural resource occupations lack of role models, and lack of marketing by natural resource agencies This indicates that natural resource agencies sh ould try to appeal to individuals that live in urban areas This is especially true with the recent migration of the American populace to more urban environments ( Migliarese 2008 ) While I have mentioned the importance of natural resource agencies remain ing relevant to minority groups with the growing minority population in the United States, it is equally as important that natural resource agencies are able to communicate well with the growing urbanized public Natural Resources and Culture W hile the low number of minority individuals in this field is partially attributed to the culture of the field ( i.e. exogenous cultural barriers), a large part of this issue stems from the culture of minority groups ( i.e. endogenous cultural barriers) Endogenous cultural barriers are more difficult for natural resource agencies to directly affect Minority respondents felt significantly less exposed to the field of natural

PAGE 59

59 resources than majority respondents While this can be rectified by better marketing by na tural reso urce agencies, this barrier may be caused by the lack of emphasis on the natural resource career field in minority cultures (Wondolleck and Yaffee 20 00 ) Barriers such as the minority respondents perceived lack of role models can be resolved wi th natural resource agencies using well established minorit y individuals in target areas to recruit individuals into the natural resource profession A t the same time, minority culture can shift so that more of an emphasis is placed on natural resource re creation to create family role models that promote an appreciation for natural resources and an interest in the career field Culture can be loosely defined as a group specific behavior that is acquired from social influences (McGrew 1998) Environmental agencies, NGOs, academia, etc can on ly fully modify the external barriers (e.g. making themselves available to expos e diverse groups of children to nature, marketing to minority populations, and providing support at the professional level ) Although thi s will not alleviate the issue in its entirety, it could be the catalyst to attend to the internal barrier which is the existing culture of minority groups Once minorities perceive that they thrive and grow in this field as they do in others, it will be much easier for natural resource agencies to communicate the need of minority participation to minority groups. Using already well established individuals in the field as innovators and role models, natural resource agencies and organizations can convey t he importance of minority and urban participation in not only the career field, but also dec i sion making Pope (2012) in his review of harnessing diversity in the United States concurs that one of the keys to encouraging minority participation in a variety of career fields involves

PAGE 60

60 using occupational role model s and to overcome societal stereotyping as a limitation on occupational choice For both minority and majority groups, it was interesting to discover that mothers were reportedly less supportive and reportedly less influential to respondents. This suggests not only a racial bias in natural resource occupations, but also a gender bias. My study, with 25% of respon dents being women natural r esource employees attests to the low number of women in the field. More research on the effect of women in non traditional careers could be beneficial of the field of natural resources. It is possible that women, especially minority women, are important individuals for natural resource agencies to target for effective institutional and cultural change. Just as it is important that we are discovering and learning what the barriers are to minority participation in the field, it is important that I think of how to create action that will be a catalyst for cultural changes While the SCCT can be used to investigate and test for barriers within a group, it is important to follow up such research with frameworks such as the Diffusion of Innovations to put into action changes that will help overcome the barriers researched in my study. Looking into why and how certain groups have specific relationships with their environment is in an excellent way to integrate multiple academic disciplines (e.g. sociology, psychology, and anthropology) with the field of natural resources This subject of study would greatly benefit from research that looked into the description and affects of barriers of individuals not yet in the field of natural resources As this study looked into the view of adults already in the field, it could be greatly aided by a view of youth that have not yet identified a career path

PAGE 61

61 APPENDIX A REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES Table A 1 Scientific articles that were revie wed for this study. Author Purpose Study Source Results / Recommendations 1. Albert & Luzzo 1999 E xamine SCCT and attribution theory and identify strategies for including exogenous barriers into career counseling H igh school and college students Include career counseling that takes endogenous barriers into account to improve student efficacy 2. Armstrong et al. 2007 Use the SCCT to determine steps taken by individual into their natural resource interests College level African American ecology students Family support, research experience, and positive view of ecology career are most important to career path pursuit 3. Baker 2000 Review of challenges to recruitment and retention and examine existing recruitment programs Literature Review There are many challenges to recruitment and retention; however, progress in outreach, social support, internship, programs, and mentoring could help decrease these challenges 4. Bandura 1977 Explain and predict different treatments that will affect self efficacy Litera ture Review and theory proposal Personal efficacy is derived from four principal sources of information and arise from four sources 5. Blockstein 1990 Examine the underrepresentation of women and minorities in science Survey of AIBS members Programs must be undertaken to improve minority and women participation or shortages will become even more severe 6. Blockstein et al. 1992 Learn more about the status of scientists in various biological disciplines Member societies of AIBS Many of the scientists are l acking in funding which could be discouraging to students who are looking long term for graduate school and professional opportunities 7. Bogat & Rednar 1985 Discusses the importance of mentoring for psychologists in both grad school and professional positions Literature Review Lack of mentors, especially for women, may be a problem that can only be solved by changing the current set up of the academic atmosphere 8 Bullard et al. 2007 Report on various environmental justice data from 1987 2007 2000 Census data and minority areas near hazardous waste facilities Racial disparities in hazardous waste distribution is higher than initially thought 9 Chawla 1998 Review literature in regards to environmental sensitivity and its affect on environmental awa reness Literature Review There is a wide scope of future research needed especially those dealing with a focus on significant life experiences 1 0 Chesney 1981 Examine natural resource professions, career decision making, and barriers to minority entry Literature Review Minorities should consider natural resources as a professional option and authoritative figures should promote nature resources as a viable career choice

PAGE 62

62 Table A 1 Continued Author Purpose Study Source Results / Recommendations 1 1 Davis et al. 2002 Explore possible actions The Wildlife Society can take to increase minority participation in the profession Literature Review Increase marketing, partnerships, incentives, and outreach but attention should also be g iven to fixing retention issues 1 2 Decker et al. 1996 Describe stakeholder approach to wildlife management Literature Review Describe methods and challenges to increasing stakeholder participation in natural resource decisions 1 3 Gee & Payne Sturges 2004 Determine if psychosocial stress plays a role in vulnerability to environmental hazards Literature Review Residential segregation leads to different experiences of community stress and this heightens vulnerability to environmental hazards 1 4 Gottfredson 1981 Present theory of development of occupational aspirations Literature Review The developmental theory could be used to alter and improve counseling practices 1 5 Haring 1999 Explore causes of low success rates in minority mentoring program s Literature Review Propose program designs which are based on the reflection of roles that can be played in mentoring relationships and culturally sensitive mentoring model 1 6 Hartung et al. 2005 Consolidate knowledge and discover avenues for further childhood developmental research Literature Review Vocational development begins earlier than initially thought and what children learn during this early stage has a large affect on life choices and career decisions 1 7 Hoerner & Robinson 2008 Examining climate change and environmental justice and how it relates to African American populations Report Literature Review Economic, environmental, and political impacts are amplified on African American populations which can be extrapolated to being a detriment to the majority population 1 8 Holland et al. 1992 To expand on information presented in an ESA survey on the demographic profiles of member ecologists ESA Member scientists ESA should work towards educating more individuals in ecology and funding should be targeted at programs that promote education in the field 19 Howard et al. 2010 Examines academic and career goals of urban youth along with their exogenous career barriers and their plans to overcome them In person Interviews of high school urb an youth Urban youth were able to identify an ideal job with an equally desirable alternative; however, they were not knowledgeable about their jobs in detail 2 0 Hudson 2001 Discuss challenges in the field of environmental education Literature Review Human population growth and industrial use are posing new challenges to which the field must adapt 2 1 Jackson et al. 2006 Examine school and work barrier beliefs of education barriers to career aspirations Low income, inner city minority youth should be used on said individual to promote self regulated emotional responses and efficacy

PAGE 63

63 Table A 1 Continued Author Purpose Study Source Results / Recommendations 2 2 Jenkins 2003 Discuss the lack of understanding of science among the general public Literature Review Both teaching and assessment approaches will have to change in order to increase understanding among students and the general public 2 3 Kardash 2000 Evaluate the extent to which an undergraduate research experience increased the research skills of science undergraduates Science undergraduates participating in an undergraduate research experience Some skills were enhanced more so than others and females were less likely to pe rceive and increase in their ability to create research hypotheses than did their male counterparts 2 4 Kaufman 2004 Examine recent sociology literature on endogenous explanations of culture phenomena Literature Review The three newer types of cultural an alysis discussed call for further examination and call for the rise of a new trend of sociology in the future 2 5 Lawrence et al. 1993a To expand on information presented in an ESA survey on the demographic profiles of member ecologists ESA Member scientists ESA should work towards educating more individuals in ecology and funding should be targeted at programs that promote education in the field 2 6 Lawrence et al. 1993b To expand on information presented in an ESA survey on the demographic profil es of member ecologists ESA Member scientists ESA should work towards educating more individuals in ecology and funding should be targeted at programs that promote education in the field 2 7 Leatherberry & Wellman 1988 Examine how college bound, African American, high school students view forestry professions Virginia African American high school students forestry career field is generally lacking and education could benefit both students and forestry organizations 2 8. Lent et al. 1994 Present a framework for understanding aspects of career development Literature Review Self efficacy, expected outcome, and goals are may interrelate with endogenous factors in career development; however more empirical and theory extension studies are needed 29 Lent et al. 2000 Consider methods to which variables and hypotheses of the SCCT can be examined Literature Review Further research, different than what has already been studied, should be stimulated by the hypotheses presented 3 0 Maton et al. 2000 Examine the effectiveness of Meyerhoff Scholars Program at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County Interview and surveying of university students Many of the programs components were viewed as acad emic success 3 1 Massey 1992 Discuss recent success in minority growth in natural resources despite past failures to increase numbers Literature Review Increasing numbers of minorities in the sciences is a long road that takes commitment

PAGE 64

64 Table A 1 Continued Author Purpose Study Source Results / Recommendations 3 2 Maughan et al. 2001 Evaluate the Minority Training Program at the Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Program Evaluation Strong mentoring component a key factor in success of program 3 3 Meeker 1973 Discuss various values of individuals in regard to National Parks Literature Review Some of the advertised myths and values surrounding national parks stem from Western culture and therefore may not appeal to some minority ethnic groups 3 4 Moss 2011 Implement and undergraduate research internship to increase understanding in agricultural sciences Survey of underrepresented, undergraduate, students After completing the program students repor ted an increase understanding of research and agricultural science 3 5 Quimby et al. 2007 Examine the influence of social cognitive variables environmental science careers Majority and minority undergraduates in science majors Self efficacy, outcome expectations, mentors, exogenous barriers, and environmental concerns were interest in environmental science 3 6 Roche 1979 Determine the effect of mentors on individuals in business careers Survey of individuals in business careers There were certain characteristics of mentors that made some individuals more encouraging to their protg counterparts than others 3 7 Staniec 2004 Determine whether race and gender play a significant role in college major National Educational Longitudinal Study data on entering college freshman Females are less likely and Asians and African Americans are more likely to choose a major in science, engineering, and math 38 Strife & Downey 2009 Highlight existing literature about childhood exposure to nature and summarize race based inequalities in regard to access to nature Literature Review exposure to nature should be a vital factor in environmental inequality studies 39 S uper 1980 Presenting a Life Career Rainbow to conceptualize multidimensional careers Literature Review Propose various methods in which to use the Life Career Rainbow 4 0 Swanson et al. 1996 Address the assessment of career barriers Literature Review The Career Barriers Inventory can be used to assess other career barriers 4 1 S w anson & Woitke 1997 Review literature on careers and provide recommendations on how theories such as the SCCT can be utilized in career counseling Literature R eview The SCCT allows career theory to be translated well into practice. Using barriers when providing career counseling is important for understanding the relationship between career choices and implementation

PAGE 65

65 Table A 1 Continued Author Purpose Study Source Results / Recommendations 4 2 Taylor 2007 Examine student perception of the importance of diversity factors in their decisions to accept a job Survey of students in nine environmental disciplines Diversifying ranks will increase the effectiveness of environmental educators 4 3 Valdez 1995 Asses how recent production of Hispanic undergraduate students in natural resource profession compared with the anticipated changing US demographic Ten university departments in 7 states. The number of Hispanic graduates in natural resource professions is lower than the anticipated change in demographic, however the number is increasing in Texas 4 4 Van Ardsol et al. 1965 Summarize environmental hazards in regard to organization of urban neighborhoods Literature Review It is important to consider the urban annoyances when utilizing urban sites for environmental hazards 4 5 Van Liere & Dunlap 1980 Examines existing works in regard to public concern with environmental quality Literature Review Future research would be beneficial in discovering relationships between demographics, social variables, and environmental concerns 4 6 Vaske et al. 2001 Examines the relationship between background and environm ental value orientation about forest management Survey of Colorado residents Provides empirical support for expanding the cognitive hierarchy to include found predictors to preemptively understand a management issues 4 7 Weintraub et al. 2011 Examine multicultural eco high schools to determine if a substantial population of potential college recruits have remained untapped to natural resource recruitment Multicultural eco high schools in 29 states More minority individuals in multicultural eco high schools could be targeted to increase the number of high performing minority university students in natural resources 48 Wyche & Frierson 1990 Describe the need for continuous programs to reach minority students star ting at an early age Literature Review Mentors are very important factors for minority individuals at undergraduate and graduate levels especially for those in sciences and engineering

PAGE 66

66 APPENDIX B IRB APPROVAL

PAGE 67

67 APPENDIX C PRELIMINARY INTERVIEW QUESTIONS Preliminary Interview Questions 1. Tell me about your ethnic background. 2. Did you grow up in a rural or urban area and where do you live now? 3. What drew you into a job in the natural resources? 4. What do you enjoy about your job? 5. What do you dislike abo ut your job? 6. What are some changes that could be made to improve natural resources? 7. Why do you think minorities shy away from the field of natural resources? Pilot Survey Interview Questions 1. What questions or statements that you did not understand or were confusing? Why? 2. What questions were difficult to answer? Why? 3. What questions did you think were overly sensitive or objectionable? Why? 4. Which questions may have biased your answers? How? 5. Were there any questions that you think should have been asked but w ere not? 6. Were all possible response categories included for each close ended question? If not, which questions were missing responses? 7. Was the questionnaire too long? 8. Did the flow or organization of the questionnaire make sense, or did it seem disorganized ? 9. Was the questionnaire cluttered or was the appearance distracting? 10. Did the questionnaire create a positive impression that motivated you to respond? 11. Did you notice any spelling or grammatical errors? If so, where?

PAGE 68

68 APPENDIX D SURVEY

PAGE 69

69

PAGE 70

70

PAGE 71

71

PAGE 72

72

PAGE 73

73

PAGE 74

74

PAGE 75

75

PAGE 76

76

PAGE 77

77

PAGE 78

78

PAGE 79

79

PAGE 80

80

PAGE 81

81

PAGE 82

82

PAGE 83

83

PAGE 84

84

PAGE 85

85

PAGE 86

86

PAGE 87

87

PAGE 88

88

PAGE 89

89

PAGE 90

90

PAGE 91

91

PAGE 92

92

PAGE 93

93 LIST OF REFERENCES Adams, C. E. and Moreno, M. 1998. A c omparative s tudy of n atural r esource p rofessionals in m inority and m ajority g roups in the s outheastern United States Wildlife Society Bulletin 26 ( 4 ): 971 981 Albe r t, K. A. and Luzzo, D. A. 1999. The role of perceived barriers in career development: a social cognitive perspective. Journal of Counseling and Development 77: 431 436. Armstrong M J Berkowitz A R Dyer L A and Taylor J. 2007. Understanding w hy u nderrepresented s tudents p ursue e cology c areers: a p reliminary c ase s tudy. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 5 (8):415 420. Baker, B. 2000. Recruiting minorities to the biological sciences. BioScienc e 50 (3) : 191 195. Bandura, A. 1977. Self efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review 84 (2):191 215. Bandura, A. 1986. Social f oundations of t hought and a ction: A s ocial c ognitive t heory Prentice Hall, New Jersey. Bandura, A. 1997. Self efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman, New York Beeghley, L. 2004. The Structure of Social Stratification in the United States. Pearson, Allyn & Bacon Boston, Massachusetts Berryman, S. E. 1983. Who will do science? Minority and female attainment of science and mathematics degrees: Trends and causes. Rockefeller Foundation special report New York, New York. Blockstein, D. E. 1990. Women and minorities: How are the AIBS societies doing? BioScience 40 : 607 609. Blockstein, D., Mandula, B., & Ploetz, J. 1992. Survey of AIBS societies membership trends and perceptions of the future. BioScience 10 : 786 788. BLS (Bureau of Labor Statistics). 2012. Educational attainment for workers 25 years and older by detailed occupation, 2009. A vailable from http://www.bls.gov/ emp/ep_table_111.htm ( last accessed Jan 2013 ) BLS. 2013. Demographics: Age. Available from http://www.bls.gov/cps/ occupation_age.htm (last accessed Feb 2013). Bogat, C A. a nd Rednar R L. 1985. How mentoring affects t he professional development of women in psychology. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice 16: 851 859.

PAGE 94

94 Brown S V. 2000. The preparation of minorities for academic careers in science and engineering: how well are doing? In Campbell Jr G, Denes R, a nd Morrison C editors. Oxford University Press, New York, N ew York. Bryant, B. 1995. Environmental Justice: Issues, Policies, and Solutions Island Press Washington DC. Bullard, R. D., Mohai P Saha R. and Wright, B. 2007. Toxic Wastes and Race at Twenty 1987 2007. United Church of Christ. Cleveland, Ohio. Census Bureau. 2004. U.S. Interim Projections by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin. Available from http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/usinterimproj/ ( last accessed Feb 2012 ) Census Bureau. 2008. An Older and More Diverse Nation by Midcentury. Available from https://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/population/cb08 123.html ( last accessed Jan 2013 ) Census Bureau. 20 11 Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin: 2010 2010 Census Briefs. Available from http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br 02.pdf (last accessed Mar 2013). Census Bureau. 2012. Most Children Younger Than Age 1 are Minorities, Census Bureau Reports. Available from http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/ archives/population /cb12 90.html ( last accessed Jan 2013 ) Chawla L. 1998. Significant life experiences revisited: a review of research on sources of environmental sensitivity. Journal of Environmental Education 29: 11 21. Chen M T C ook, J R Jr., and Powell L V III. 1989. The minority opportunities study. The CEIP Fund, Boston, Massachusetts Chesney C E. 198 1 Should racial minorities consider careers in natural resources. Journal of N on W hite C oncerns in P ersonnel and G uidance 9 (4):146 153. Claussen, J. E. and Fabrizzio, M. C. 1992. Equal opportunities in fisheries sciences. Women in Natural Resources 13:30 31. Davis, R. D., Diswood, S., Dominguez, A., Engel Wilson, R. W., Jefferson, K., Miles, A. K., et al. 2002. Increasing diversity in our profession. Wild life Society Bulletin 30 : 628 633. Decker, D. J., Krueger, C. C., Baer, R. A. Jr., Knuth B. A. and Richmond M. E 1996. From clients to stakeholders: A philosophical shift for fish and wildlife management. Hum an Dimensions of Wild life 1 : 70 82. Dillman, D A., Smyth, J. D., and Christian, L. M. 2009. Internet, Mail, and Mixed Mode Surveys. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.

PAGE 95

95 Forman, C. 2011. Diversity Change Agents Work To Transform NPS Culture NPS Digest. Available from http://home.nps.gov/app lications/digest/ headline.cfm?type=Announcements&id=12900 (last accessed May 2013). Frey, W. H. 2011. The New Metro Minority Map: Regional Shifts in Hispanics, Asians, and Blacks from Census 2010 Metropolitan Policy Program at Brookings. Available from http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/ files/papers/2011/8/31%20census%20race%20frey/0831_census_race_frey (last accessed Apr 2013). Gee G., and Payne Sturges D health disparities: A framework for integrating psychosocial and e Perspectives 17: 1645 1653. Gilbert, D. 2002 The American Class Structure: In An Age of Growing Inequality. Wadsworth Belmont, C alifornia. Gottfredson, L. S. 1981. Circumscription and compromise: a developmenta l theory of occupational aspirations. Journal of Counseling Psychology 28 : 545 579. Hackett, G., Betz, N. E., Casas, J. M., and Rocha Singh, I. A. (1992). Gender, ethnicity, and social cognitive factors predicting the academic achievement of students in engineering. Journal of Counseling Psychology 39(4): 527 538. Haring, M J. 1997. Networking mentoring as a preferred model for guiding programs for underrepresented students. Pages 63 76 in H.T. Frierson, editor. Diversity in higher education. JAI Press, Greenwich, Connecticut Haring, M J. 1999. The case for a conceptual base for minority mentoring programs. Peabody Journal of Education 74: 5 14. Hartung, P., Porfeli, E., Vondracek, F.,2005. Child vocational development: a review and reconsideration. Jour nal of Vocational Behavior 66:385 419. Hinch, T., Jackson, E. L., Hudson, S., and Walker, G. J. 2005. Leisure constraint theory and sport tourism. Sport in Society 8: 142 163. default/files/Hoerner%20and%20Robinson_Climate%20of%20Change.pdf (last accessed A pr 2013). H odgdon H. E. 1980. Enrollment of women and ethnic minorities in wildlife curricula: 1977. Wildlife Society Bulletin 8 :158 163. Hodgdon, H. E. 1982. Wildlife enrollment of women and ethnic minorities: 1979. Wildlife Society Bulletin 10 :175 18 0. Hodgdon, H. E. 1990. Wildlife student enrollment in 1987. Wildlife Society Bulletin 18 :442 446.

PAGE 96

96 Hoerner, A. J. and Robinson, N. 2008. A climate of change: African Americans, global warming, and a just climate policy in the U.S. Environmental Justice an d Climate Change Initiative. Available from http://www.climateaccess.org/sites/ Holland, M. M., Lawrence, D. M., Morrin, D. J., Hunsaker, C., Inouye, D., Janetos, A., et al. 1992. Profiles of ecologists: r esults of a survey of the membership of the Ecologi cal Society of America. Ecological Society of America, Washington, DC Howard K. A. .S, Budge S. L., Guitierrez B., Owen A. D., Lemke N., Jones J. E., and Higgins K. 2010. Future plans of urban youth: influences, perceived barriers, and coping strategies j ournal of career development, 37(4): 655 676. Hudson, S. J. 2001. Challenges for environmental education: i ssues and ideas for the 21st century. BioScience 41( 4), 283 288. Hudson, S. Walker G. J. ,Simpson B., and Hinch T. 2013 The Influence of Ethnicit y and Self Construal on Leisure Constraints, Leisure Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Journal 35 ( 2 ): 145 166 Jackson, M. A., Kacanski, J. M., Rust, J. P., and Beck, S. E. 2006. Constructively challenging diverse inner and career barriers and supports. Journal of Career Development 32 : 203 218. Jenkins, E. W. 2003. Environmental education and the public understanding of science. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 1 : 437 443. J ones M. C. 1993. A profile of black agri culture students at selected 1862 and 1890 land grant institutions. Thesis, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Lawrence, D. M., Holland, M. M., & Morrin, D. J. 1993a. Profiles of ecologists: Results of a survey of the membership of the Ecologic al Society of America, Part I. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 74 : 21 35. Lawrence, D. M., Holland, M. M., & Morrin, D. J. 1993b. Profiles of ecologists: Results of a survey of the membership of the Ecological Society of America, Part II. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 74 : 153 169. Leatherberry, E C ., and Wellman, J D. 1988. Black High School Stud ents' Images of Forestry as a Profession. The Journal of Negro Education, 57 (2): 208 219. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., and Hackett, G. 1994. Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance [Monograph]. Journ al of Vocational Behavior 45: 79 122. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. 2000. Contextual Supports and Barriers to Career Choice: A Social Cognitive Analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology 47: 36 49.

PAGE 97

97 Louv, R. 2005. Last Child in the Woods: Saving Ou r Children from Nature Deficit Disorder Algonquin Books Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Maddux, J. E. 1995. Self efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: t heory, research and application. Plenum Press, New York Martine, G., & Villarreal, M. (1997). Gender and sustainability: Re assessing linkages and issues, sustainable development department (SD) Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nation (FAO). Available from http://www.fao.org/ sd/wpdirect/wpan0018.htm (last accessed Jun 2013). Massey W E. 19 92. A success story amid decades of disappointment. Science 258: 1177 1179. Maton K I Hrabowski III F A and Schmitt C L. 2000. African American college students excelling in the sciences: college and postcollege outcomes in the Meyerhoff Scholars Program. J ournal of Res earch in Sci ence Teaching 37: 629 54. Maughan O E Bounds D L Morales S M and Villegas S.V 2001. A Successful Educational Program for Minority Students in Natural Resources. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29 (3):917 928. McGrew, W.C. 1998. Culture in Nonhuman Primates? Annual Review of Anthropology 27 : 301 328 Meeker, J. W., Woods, W. K., & Lucas, W. 1973. Red, white and black in the national parks. North American Review 258 : 6 10. Migliarese N. 2008. Researching the Child ~ Natur e Connection Children in Nature Campaign Available from www.parks.ca.gov (last accessed Apr 2013). Morrison, D. E., Hornback, K. E., and Warner, W. K. 1972. The environmental movement: Some preliminary observations and predictions I n W. Burch, N. Clark, & L. Taylor editors. Social behavior, natural resources, and the environment. Harper, New York Moss J Q. 2011. An u ndergraduate s ummer r esearch and m entorship e xperience for u nderrepresented s tudents in the a gricultural s ciences. North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture Journal 55 (1) :32 37. NCES (National Center for Education Statistics).1997. Minorities in Higher Education. U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC.

PAGE 98

98 NCES. 2012a. Table A 48 1. Percentage of 25 to 29 year olds who attained the selected levels of education, by race/ethnicity and sex: Selected years, 1980 2011. Available from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/tables/table eda 1.asp ( last accessed Jan 2013 ) NCES. 2012b. U.S. Department of Educati on report, Percentage of high school dropouts among persons 16 through 24 years old (status dropout rate), by sex and race/ethnicity: Selected years, 1960 through 2011. Ormrod, J. E. 2006. Educational psychology: Developing learners 5 th edition. Pearson/M errill Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, N ew Jersey. OTS (Organization for Tropical Studies). 2007. Advisory Committee for Academic Diversity Manual of Best Practices for Recruiting and Retaining Underrepresented Groups in Ecology and the Environmental Sc iences. Pajares, F. and Urdan, T. editors 2006. Self efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Information Age, Greenwich, Connecticut P onds P. D. 1993. Under representation of minorities in natural resource professions: an examination of African Americans. Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis. Pope, M. 2012. Embracing and harnessing diversity in the US workforce: what have we learned? Int ernational J ournal for Edu cational and Vocat ional Guidance 12 :17 30 Quimby J L Seyala N D and Wolfson J L. 2007. Social Cognitive Predictors of Interest in Environmental Science: Recommendations for Environmental Educators. The Journal of Environmental Education 38 (3): 43 52. Roche G R. 1979. Much ado about mentors. Harvard Business Review 57: 14 24. Rogers E M. 1983. Diffusion of I nnovations Free Press, New York, USA. Salant, P., and Dillman, D. A. 1994. How to conduct your own survey. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Schwarzer, R. editor 1992. Self efficacy: Thought control of action. Hemisphere, Washi ngton, D C. Sims, C. 1992. What went wrong: why programs failed. Science 258: 1185 1187. Staniec J F O. 2004. THE effects of race, sex, and expected returns on the choice of college major. Eastern Economic Journal 30 (4):549 562. Strife, S., and Downey L and access to nature A new direction for environmental inequality research. Organization & Environment 22 (1):99 122.

PAGE 99

99 Super, D. 1980. A life span, life space approach to career development. Journal of Vocational Behavior 16 : 2 82 298. Swanson, J. L., Daniels, K. K., and Tokar, D. M. 1996. Assessing perceptions of career related barriers: The Career Barriers Inventory. Journal of Career Assessment 4 (2): 219 244. Swanson, J. L., and Woitke, M. B. 1997. Theory into practice in caree r assessment for women: Assessment and interventions regarding perceived career barriers. Journal of Career Assessment 5 (4): 431 450. SWOP ( SouthWest Organizing Project ) Letter to the Group of Ten. March 16, 1990. Taylor, D.E. 2007. Diversity and Equity in Environmental Organizations: The Salience of These Factors to Students. The Journal of Environmental Education 39(1): 14 43. Thompson, W. and Hickey, J. 2005. Society in Focus. Pearson, Allyn & Bacon Boston, Massachusetts Tidwell, T. 2011. Transformin g Forest Service Culture: A Commitment to Inclusiveness presented at the Blacks in Government National Training Conference Boston, Massachusetts Valdez R. 1995. Hispanic undergraduates in wildlife and fishery sciences in the western United States. Wildl ife Society Bulletin 23: 574 578. Van Ardsol, M. D., Sabagh, G., and Alexander, F. 1965. Reality and the perception of environmental hazards. Journal of Health and Human Behavior 5 : 144 153. Van Liere, K. D., and Dunlap, R. 1980. The social bases of environm ental concern: A review of hypothesis, explanations, and empirical evidence. Public Opinion Quarterly 44 : 181 197. Vaske J J Donnelly M P Williams D R Jonker S. 2001. Demographic influences on environmental value orientations and normative belie fs about national forest management. Society and Natural Resources 14 (9):761 776. Vondracek, F. W, Lerner, R. M., and Schulenberg, J. E. 1986. Career development: A life span developmental approach. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey. Walker, G. J., and Virden R.J. 2005. Constraints on outdoor recreation. Pages 201 219 i n E. L. Jackson editors. Constraints to leisure Venture Publishing, State College, P ennsylvania. Weintraub, M Park A. and Jang S 2011. Diversifying the environmental workforce: Addressing an early environmental justice challenge. Environmental Justice, 4 (1) : 27 44.

PAGE 100

100 Welch O M. 1997. An examination of effective mentoring models in academe. Pages 41 62 in H.T. Frierson, editor. Dive rsity in higher education. JAI Press, Greenwich, Connecticut W hite P. E. 1992. Women and minorities in science and engineering: an update. National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C. Wondolleck, J. M. and Yaffee, S. L. 2000. Developing Agencies, Organi zations, and Communities. Making Collaborations Work: Lessons from Innovations in Natural Resource Management. Island Press, Washington DC Wyche J H ., and Frierson H T Jr. 1990. Minorities at majority institutions. Science 249: 989 991.

PAGE 101

101 BIOGRAP HICAL SKETCH Tabitha C. Morgan graduated from Tuskegee University in Tuskegee, Alabama in May 20 11 with a Bachelor of Science in Animal Science Wildlife Option During the senior year of her undergraduate career she made use of an agreement between Tuskege e University and University of Florida (UF) which allowed her to complete her senior year at the UF. During her time at UF as an undergrad, Tabitha participated in an research project involving gopher tortoises ( Gopherus polyphemus ) with faculty member, Dr. James Perran Ross. Here she made the connection with her graduate committee advisor. In August 20 11 s he began h er graduate work, i n the Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation at the University of Florida. She maintained an A average in his courses in graduate school, and even co founded a student organization called the Natural Resource Diversity Initiative This student organization helped expose diverse groups of individuals to career paths in natural resources. She al so participated in a study abroad class given by the department in Swaziland, Africa that looked at wildlife and the relationships people had with them. From research done during this program she published a short note title d Are Southern Black Flycatchers (Melaenornis pammelaina) associated with Fork tailed Drongos (Dicrurusadsimilis)? (201 2). After graduation from the graduate program, Tabitha will be moving to Washington DC to work as a policy analyst with USDA Forest Service