Post on 23-Dec-2015
Motivational Factors Related to Youth Performance in a Horticulture
Career Development Event
Amy JonesDr. Neil KnoblochDr. Kathryn Orvis
Dr. Levon Esters
Introduction
According to the National FFA Organization…“The role of career development events is to motivate students and encourage leadership, personal growth,
citizenship and career development” (2006, p. 5)
(Radhakrishna, 2006, Lepper & Greene, 1978; Weber & McCullers, 1986; Johnson, 1914)
personal skills and goals and career development (Blakely, 1993)
Competition Mixed Results
Introduction
• Horticulture Industry Certification– Professional Landcare Network– American Society for Horticultural Sciences– Botanical Gardens– Indiana Nursery & Landscape Association
• Horticulture Degree Programs– Approx. 54 on-campus
• Horticulture Careers– Wide Variety– Various Degree Requirements
The purpose of this research study was to explore youth’s…
Purpose of Study
Knowledge Motivation Learning Experiences
and to describe relationships between
Youth Motivation
Coach Motivation
Learning and Preparation
Youth’s Performance
in a competitive out-of-school horticulture career development experience.
Conceptual Framework
Youth Motivation -Intrinsic Value -Utility Value -Attainment Value -Cost -Self-Efficacy
Pre-CDE Educational Experiences Coach Motivation -Intrinsic Value -Utility Value -Attainment Value -Cost -Self-Efficacy Learning and Preparation -Learning Resources -Preparation Time
CDE Outcomes CDE Performance -General Knowledge Exam -Identification Exam -Product Evaluation Exam
I.V.
D.V.
4 Research Questions
• Expectancy-Value Theory
• Self-Efficacy
Theoretical Framework
Expectancies and Values
achievementperseverancecompletion
(Eccles & Wigfield, 2002)
Personal beliefs
thoughts/feelingsmotivationbehaviors
(Bandura, 1994)
Review of Literature
Youth Motivation
•Six themes of how Oklahoma secondary agriculture teachers motivated their students to participate in CDEs Russell et al. (2009)•Students’ motives to participate in CDE were different than their teachers’ motives (Croom et al., 2005)
Preparation
•Visits to garden centers and greenhouses were the main preparation aid, followed by videos and slides, websites, textbooks, and university’s living laboratories (Poskey et. al, 2005)
Performance•Demographical differences between low and high performers at a Livestock Evaluation CDE (Theiman et. al, 2010)
Competition
•Of the four specific organizational elements of CTSOs (leadership, community service, competitions, and professional development) competition had the most constructive effects (Alfed et. al, 2007)
• Exploratory, descriptive study• QUAN + qual• Questionnaire distribution• Performance– General Knowledge Exam• 80 questions (800 Points, 36%)
– Identification Exam• 100 specimen (1000 Points, 45%)
– Product Evaluation Exam• 8 classes (400 Points, 18%)
Methodology
• Youth• motivation, 28 items (Post-hoc reliability 0.64 – 0.89)• learning resources and preparation, 21 items • demographics, 5 items
• Coaches• motivation for having youth participate, 29 items (Post-
hoc reliability 0.63 - 0.90)• learning resources used to help youth prepare, 19 items• demographics, 9 items
Instrument
PopulationYouthGender (n = 57; 2 missing) Male: 51%
Female: 49%
Class Status Underclassmen: 54%
Upperclassmen: 46%
Years Participated in Hort CDE 1 59%
2 or more 41%
Other CDEs besides Hort? Yes 66%
CoachesGender (n = 6; 1 missing) Male: 50%
Female: 50%
Participated as youth: Yes 83%
Coach description Agricultural Teacher/FFA Advisor 100%
Years Coaching Hort 11.33 years (SD = 14.82)
Conclusion 1
Youth were motivated to participate in a competitive horticulture career development event
Cost
Utility Valu
e
Self-E
fficacy
Attainment V
alue
Intrinsic
Value
00.5
11.5
22.5
33.5
4 3.683.29 3.08 3.06
2.76
Youth Mean Motivation
*Note: Scale: 1 = None, 2 = A little, 3 = Somewhat, 4 = Quite A Lot, 5 = A Great Deal
Conclusion 1
Relationships between Youth Motivation and Youth CDE Performance CDE Performance General
Knowledge Exam
IdentificationExam
Product Evaluation
Exam
Total CDE Exam Score
Youth Motivation Intrinsic 0.35* 0.34* 0.02 0.36*Utility 0.26 0.32* -0.04 0.30*Attainment 0.28 0.33* 0.07 0.32*Cost 0.06 0.17 0.15 0.14
Self-Efficacy 0.33* 0.33* 0.05 0.34*Note. *Practically significant = medium effect size
and youth motivation was related to performance of horticultural competencies
Youth were motivated to participate in a competitive horticulture career development event
Conclusion 2
Coaches’ motivation was related to youth motivation
Relationships between Youth Motivation and Coach Motivation
Coach Motivation
Intrinsic Utility Attainment Cost Self-EfficacyYouth Motivation
Intrinsic .15 .14 .11 .14 -.08Utility .52** .28 .36* .05 -.23Attainment .21 .09 .08 .09 -.03Cost .25 .06 -.10 .12 -.05
Self-Efficacy .33* .10 .10 .05 -.09Note. Practically significant = *medium effect size or **large effect size
Relationships between Coach Motivation and Youth CDE Performance
CDE Performance General
Knowledge Exam
IdentificationExam
Product Evaluation
Exam
Total CDE Exam Score
Coach Motivation Intrinsic .50** .57** -.03 .56**Utility .48* .50** -.02 .51**Attainment
.48* .53** -.03 .53**
Cost .25 .26 .07 .26Self-Efficacy -.39* -.57** -.07 -.53**Note. Practically significant = *medium effect size or **large effect size
Conclusion 2
and youth performance of horticulture competenciesCoaches’ motivation was related to youth motivation
Time spent preparing for the horticulture career development event and learning resources used by youth were related to youth’s overall performance of horticultural competencies.
Conclusion 3
Relationships between Learning Resources and Youth CDE Performance Exam
General Knowledge Identification Product
EvaluationTotal CDE
ScoreLearning Resources
Old Tests or Quizzes .42* .40* -.14 .42*Flashcards .22 .31* -.00 .29Classroom Aids/Real-Life Materials .31* .36* -.06 .34*
Preparation TimeWith TeamAloneTotal Hours
.30*.30*.39*
.31*.34*.43*
-.07.01.04
.32*.32*.42*
Note. *Practically significant = medium effect size
Conclusion 3
However, youth did not perform horticultural competencies at a level required to be a certified horticulture manager or technician in the horticulture industry.
General Knowledge
Identification
Product
Evaluati
on
Total CDE Sc
ore0
20406080
100
61 52
95
63
Average Exam Scores (%)
• Coaches clinic– create learning environments that
• build competencies • self-efficacy
– build youth’s competencies• assessment tools of the event • career and certification guidelines
• Learning resources and assessments should reflect– university course requirements – industry certification programs
Implications
• Due to the small population and nature of the study…
• Participants and contexts– replications into events with similar contexts – replications into events with differing contexts
• Measurements and impacts– coaching strategies and learning resources prior to
event– preparation of youth for future careers, including
STEM careers
Recommendations
• My Family and Friends• Dr. Neil Knobloch• Dr. Kathryn Orvis• Dr. Levon Esters• Graduate Students• YDAE
Acknowledgements
Thank you!
Questions?