|
Fall 1986 Volume 24 Number 3 |
4-H Volunteer Training - Who Needs It!Implications for planning volunteer training.Mary Jo Cook
Nancy Ellen Kiernan
Harold R. Ott
A Myth?Many Extension agents believe that 4-H volunteers don't want to participate in leadership development, an area that includes teaching methods, 4-H philosophy, subject-matter content for projects, and child psychology.1 Specifically, agents may believe that:
These ideas pervaded the thinking of many professional Extension agents in north central and western Pennsylvania.2 If the agents' perceptions about volunteers were correct and, as a result, leadership training wasn't provided, the potential for improvement or expansion of the program in these regions could have been in jeopardy. In fact, experts on volunteer organizations have suggested that:
The lack of leadership training in 4-H could result in poor education for 4-H youth, discontented volunteers, and an increased burden in volunteer recruitment for agents. It was important, therefore, for agents to find out if their impressions were a myth or if indeed volunteers did want leadership training. Solution: Needs/Interest AssessmentIn 1984, 23 county Extension agents in north central and western Pennsylvania agreed to survey their more than 2,400 volunteer 4-H leaders to find out what the volunteers perceived their training needs to be and what delivery method they thought was most effective for each need. The survey asked the volunteers about their previous training and years of experience in 4-H to see if these 2 characteristics made a difference in the kind of training and method they wanted. A seven-page survey was developed, precoded, pretested, and distributed to the agents, who then mailed the surveys to volunteers in their counties. A record was kept of the volunteers who returned the survey, and follow-up contacts were made every two weeks with those who didn't respond. Follow-ups included a postcard, a second survey, and a final postcard. Of the volunteers, 1,533 (64%) respondents returned the needs/interest assessment; of these, 97% were usable. Three percent weren't usable, primarily because the respondents were no longer volunteers.
FindingsThe survey form listed 23 aspects of leadership (see Table 1) and asked respondents to indicate if they wanted or needed training in each one by circling "the most effective way for you to receive this help: group training sessions at county or multicounty level. one-to-one help from county staff or another leader, or-printed materials in the form of a newsletter or handbook." If they didn't want training in a particular aspects of leadership, respondents were asked to circle "none."4 In every aspect of leadership development identified in the survey, at least two-thirds of the volunteers indicated a desire to participate in training; the percentage ranged from a low of 64% in song leading and parliamentary procedure to a high of 85% in both events and opportunities for members and leaders. The results of the needs/interest assessment point out that there's a hunger for training on the part of volunteers in north central and western Pennsylvania. Effects of Previous TrainingFor each aspect of leadership, respondents were asked to indicate if they'd had previous training that had helped them carry out 4-H responsibilities. As shown in Table 1, respondents indicated their previous training was varied. As expected, the volunteers with no previous training were more likely than those with previous training to express a desire for future training. Effects of TenureVolunteers were asked the length of time they'd worked as volunteers in 4-H-their tenure. Respondents were equally represented in each of the tenure groupings: 1-2 years (30%), 3-5 years (34%), 6 or more years (36%). In general (14 of 23 aspects of leadership), tenure made no substantial difference in whether the volunteers wanted training. In the nine aspects of leadership where a relationship existed, it was in the expected direction-volunteers with fewer years of experience desired more training. Priorities for TrainingOverall, the volunteers demonstrated a hunger for training in all aspects of leadership. In this era of limited resources, however, developing a realistic training program for volunteers requires selecting some leadership aspects to set priorities. Listed in Table 2 are the aspects of leadership requested most often by volunteers. In addition, the results were analyzed to find the 10 aspects of leadership each tenure group wanted to participate in most. In the seven top priorities, tenure didn't influence the selection of the training need, but tenure did influence the selection of the last three training needs for each tenure group (see Figure 1).
Methods for TrainingThe survey asked volunteers to identify what was the most effective delivery method for each aspect of leadership in which they wanted training. The question format, outlined previously, included two types of one-to-one help-from another leader and from a county staff member; two types of group training-county meetings and multicounty meetings; and two types of printed materials-handbook and newsletter. No one method received a consensus from a majority of volunteers as most effective. For each aspect of leadership, a similar pattern emerged: the majority of volunteers who wanted training divided their support among three methods. For example, in project/subject materials (N =1,221), 30% chose group training at the county meeting, 25% chose handbook, and 24% chose one-to-one help from county staff (for a total of 79% of those who wanted training in that area); the rest divided minimally among all other methods. Listed in Table 3 are the aspects of leadership, the percentage, and number of volunteers that chose the methods effective. Only one method, the county meeting, was selected as effective in all aspects of leadership. However, the support for the county meeting in each aspect of leadership only came from a third of the volunteers.5 If future training should be based on what volunteers consider the most effective method, a variety of training methods will need to be used to reach a majority of the volunteers in any aspect of leadership. Dispelling the MythDespite the impression that agents had about volunteers not wanting to participate in training, the needs/interest assessment dramatically demonstrated that volunteers themselves appreciate and recognize their need for leadership development. Regardless of years of 4-H experience, volunteers indicated an interest in participating in a wide variety of topics. Only volunteers with previous training were somewhat less likely to want training. Also, despite many agents' impressions that volunteers prefer one-to-one help, volunteers in fact have identified a variety of methods to receive training, and methods most preferred depend on the particular aspect of leadership. Evidence also supports the agents' perception that volunteers don't wish to attend county meetings. This study suggests that it's not because they don't want training. Volunteers do want training. Rather, two-thirds of volunteers suggest that other methods besides the county meeting would be effective for them. The implications of this study for Extension agents planning to train volunteers are:
BenefitsSome of the benefits of going directly to volun teers to determine their training needs include:
SummaryDon't just rely on your perceptions of what you think volunteers want or, for that matter, on the few volunteers who communicate with you most often. Instead, survey all the volunteers through a needs/ interest assessment to find out if they want training, and if so, in what areas. Footnotes
This article is online at http://joe.org/joe/1986fall/a4.html.
Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use in educational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal Editorial Office, joe-ed@joe.org. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||