Motivation and Retention of Iowa Master Gardeners

Abstract

<jats:p>Recruitment and training of new volunteers is necessary to grow a Master Gardener organization, but retention of current individuals has advantages. Aligning reasons for volunteering with recruitment and continuing education topics with the interests of volunteers is essential in a successful recruitment and retention plan. The objectives of this study were to determine the motivations for volunteering in the Iowa Master Gardener program and to identify popular continuing education topics, preferred delivery methods, and social media usage among this audience. Learning about gardening and horticulture was the most important reason Iowa Master Gardeners volunteer with the program. In addition, altruism is important to these volunteers, but they do not recognize the full impact their projects have on their local community. They have a strong interest in learning about native plants and sustainable horticultural practices. The most preferred delivery methods were live presentations and workshops. Video presentations and webinars were generally less preferred. Respondents used certain social media sites, such as Facebook and Pinterest, some or a lot. Although this study was limited to Iowa Master Gardeners, results regarding motivation factors align closely with previous studies. We speculate that the results for advanced training topics, delivery methods, and social media usage would similarly align for Master Gardener programs across the country.</jats:p>

Are We on the Same Page? Exploring National, State, and Local Educational-response Themes for Extension Master Gardener Coordinators and Volunteers

“…A quantitative national study of current and inactive EMG volunteers and their state and local coordinators in all 49 U.S. EMG programs was conducted in Fall 2016 (University of Georgia Institutional Review Board Approval #3567). Survey protocol was based on Dillman methods for online survey research (Dillman et al, 2014) and published accounts of EMG volunteer survey research (Takle et al, 2016;Vines et al, 2016). The study included three surveys to state coordinators, local coordinators, and EMG volunteers, which built on one another and were conducted consecutively.…”

Extension Master Gardener Volunteers of the 21st Century: Educated, Prosperous, and Committed

“…A quantitative national study of current and inactive EMG volunteers and their state and local coordinators in all 49 U.S. EMG programs was conducted in Fall 2016 (University of Georgia IRB Approval #3567). Survey protocol was based on Dillman's methods for online survey research (Dillman et al, 2014) and published accounts of EMG volunteer survey research (Takle et al, 2016;Vines et al, 2016). Precedence for distributing a survey in both paper format and via Internet was set by Stukas et al (2009), who noted that age was the primary difference in respondents using these two methods.…”

“…This survey contained five sections, including EMG volunteer background and experience, reasons for volunteering, benefits from volunteering as an EMG, EMG volunteer activities, and demographic information. Questions were drawn from previous studies and existing survey instruments (Clary et al, 1998;Houle et al, 2005;Relf and McDaniel, 1994;Stukas et al, 2009;Takle et al, 2016) Volunteer demographics gathered in the present study included gender, race/ethnicity, year of birth, marital status, child status, current employment status, income range, and level of education. Several questions captured the individual's training year, number of years of active service with the program, the county in which the individual volunteered, and the number of volunteer service hours reported in 2015 (the most recent full program year).…”

“…This study suggests that EMG volunteers have a higher level of income than previous studies. In seven of eight demographic EMG studies published between 1994 and 2016 (Boyer et al, 2002;Kirsch and VanDerZanden, 2002;Relf and McDaniel, 1994;Rohs and Westerfield, 1996;Schrock et al, 2000;Takle et al, 2016;Wilson and Newman, 2011), half or more respondents indicate income levels above the U.S. Census median income for the respective year of study (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). In the present study, 76% of participants report income levels above the 2015 median income level (Posey, 2016).…”

“…State-based EMG studies show that EMG programs have historically appealed to an older demographic of 50+ years (Boyer et al, 2002;Kirsch and VanDerZanden, 2002;Relf and McDaniel, 1994;Rohs and Westerfield, 1996;Ruppert et al, 1997;Schrock et al, 2000;Strong and Harder, 2010;Takle et al, 2016;Wilson and Newman, 2011). At inception, the EMG program was targeted at nonworking individuals who had the necessary time for program commitments.…”