Teaching Sportsman Education in New York State: Exploring instructors’ motivations, experiences, and satisfaction
December 2016 HDRU Series No 16-4
Prepared by: Michael R. Quartuch, Daniel J. Decker, Richard C. Stedman, William F. Siemer, and Meghan S. Baumer Human Dimensions Research Unit Department of Natural Resources Cornell University

HUMAN DIMENSIONS RESEARCH UNIT PUBLICATION SERIES This publication is one of a series of reports resulting from investigations dealing with public issues in environmental and natural resources management. The Human Dimensions Research Unit (HDRU) in the Department of Natural Resources at Cornell University studies the social and economic aspects of natural resources and the environment and the application of social and economic insights in management planning and policy. A list of HDRU publications may be obtained by writing to the Human Dimensions Research Unit, Department of Natural Resources, Fernow Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, or by accessing our World Wide Web site at: http://www.dnr.cornell.edu/hdru.
TO CITE THIS REPORT Quartuch, M. R., D. J. Decker, R. C. Stedman, W. F. Siemer, and M. S. Baumer. 2016. Teaching Sportsman Education in New York State: Exploring instructors’ motivations, experiences, and satisfaction. Human Dimensions Research Unit Publ. Series 16-4. Dept. of Nat. Resources, Coll. of Agric. and Life Sci., Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. 34 pp. This report is available electronically at http://dnr.cornell.edu/hdru/pubs

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
Successfully passing a sportsman education (SE) course is required for all first-time hunters in New York State (NYS). SE courses are taught by volunteer instructors under the guidance and direction of NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) central office (Albany) and regional sportsman education program staff. SE staff are concerned about maintaining sufficient numbers and diversity of SE instructors to meet citizen demand for course offerings across the state. DEC staff believe that a decline in the number of SE instructors would lead to fewer courses offered each year and impede hunter recruitment. Adding to the worry about sufficient volunteer instructors to meet potential demand for SE courses, many SE instructors are minimally active; i.e., they often do not meet the basic requirements for recertification (e.g., teach at least one SE course per year, attend one refresher course every two years). In addition, some apprentice instructors withdraw their services prior to becoming certified.
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to learn why people volunteer to teach SE courses in NYS and how satisfied they are with their volunteer experience. We seek to identify the motivations, expectations, experiences, and satisfaction of different types of SE instructors at different stages in the volunteer process. Further, we wanted to understand whether and to what degree individual, interpersonal, and organizational factors influence decisions by active instructors to continue teaching SE in NYS.
Objectives
1. Describe SE instructors’ motivations to teach SE, expectations about teaching SE prior to volunteering with the program, and experiences as an instructor.
2. Examine the degree to which SE instructors are satisfied with their experience and for how long they intend to continue teaching SE.
Methods
We developed a mail survey instrument to collect data on currently active SE instructors, defined by DEC as volunteers who had taken a refresher course within the previous two years and taught at least one SE course within the previous year. Active instructors were identified using DEC SE Regional Coordinator databases. The sample was comprised of 2,126 SE instructors (1,962 active; 164 Master).
The survey instrument contained five sections and explored topics that included: instructor recruitment, reasons for volunteering, expectations and experiences as a DEC SE volunteer, and satisfaction with the SE program (Appendix A).
i

Survey implementation followed a standard 4-wave mailing procedure. An initial invitation to participate and a copy of the questionnaire were mailed on March 2, 2015. A reminder was mailed to nonrespondents on March 9 followed by a second questionnaire on March 23. A final reminder was mailed on March 30.
Key findings
• Response rate. In total, 1,394 questionnaires were returned. Sixty one questionnaires were returned as undeliverable, resulting in 1,333 usable responses and a 68% response rate. We conducted telephone surveys with 100 nonrespondents and determined there were no statistically significant differences between survey respondents and nonrespondents.
• Respondent characteristics. The vast majority of respondents were male (95%) and 94% self-identified as White/Caucasian. The mean age of respondents was 62 years old.
o Current role with the DEC SE program. The majority (89%) of respondents were certified instructors; 11% were Master instructors. The term “certified” refers to a formal designation used by DEC in their certification of instructors. Most have been teaching SE for 19 years (mean). More respondents taught Hunter Education (92%) than Bow (63%), Trapping (8%), or Waterfowl (5%) Education courses. The majority (89%) taught with the same group of instructors each year and had done so for 11 years (mean).
o Recruitment of SE instructors. More respondents’ were recruited to teach SE by a certified instructor (74%) or close friend (56%) than by a family member (34%) or by DEC SE staff (30%).
• Instructor motivations. Overall, respondents believed in the importance of SE and expressed a desire to ensure the program continued in the future. The majority (81%) also teach SE because of their personal values, convictions, and beliefs. Nearly all respondents volunteer with the SE program to teach others how to be safe while hunting (97%) and to maintain the tradition of hunting (91%). Very few respondents teach SE to continue learning about SE or because of social pressure from friends and family. For example, only 11% teach SE because the people closest to them volunteer and 10% teach SE because the people closest to them want them to volunteer.
• Training and support: Instructor expectations and experiences. Prior to volunteering with the SE program, most respondents expected to receive excellent instruction during new instructor training (78%); 80% expected to have access to supplies following instructor training (percentages represent slight-to-strong agreement). However, examining only those responses indicating strong agreement, illustrates a more nuanced perspective. For example, approximately half (51%) of respondents expected to receive excellent instruction during SE training and 53% expected to have access to teaching materials following SE training. About one-quarter (27%) expected to have help finding other volunteers with whom they could teach SE.
ii

Overall, most respondents’ experiences were positive yet few exceeded expectations with respect to instructor training and support. For example, 47% strongly agreed that they received excellent instruction during new instructor training; 38% were able to access a variety of teaching supplies following training; and 23% had help finding other volunteers with whom they could teach SE.
• Internal-team relationships: Instructor expectations and experiences. A strong majority of respondents held positive expectations about teaching SE and about other volunteers. Prior to entering the SE program, 93% expected to enjoy teaching SE with other instructors and 89% expected to get along well with other instructors (percentages represent slight-to-strong agreement). Respondents’ experiences with other instructors exceeded their expectations. Nearly all respondents get along well with the instructors on their team (95%) and enjoy teaching with them (95%). Most (82%) believed the instructors on their team are very good at teaching SE.
• Instructor satisfaction. Overall, most (62%) respondents were very satisfied with their volunteer experience. However, respondents were more satisfied with experiences related to teaching SE than they were with the support they received from DEC SE staff. For example, the majority of respondents were very satisfied with their relationships with team members (81%); with their ability to teach SE well (68%); and with the difference they believe their work is making (65%). Approximately one-third were very satisfied with how frequently DEC SE staff acknowledged the work they do and 29% were very satisfied with the frequency with which they are provided feedback about how they teach SE.
• Interest in continuing to teach SE. The majority of respondents intend to continue teaching SE in New York State. Over three-quarters of respondents reported that they were very likely to volunteer with the DEC SE program for at least another year (79%) and nearly as many reported that they were very likely to volunteer as long as they are able to (69%).
• Instructors’ perceptions about their ability to influence the SE program. Most (66%) respondents strongly agreed that input from instructors would lead to a better SE program and over half (59%) are comfortable voicing their opinion about issues they have with the SE program to DEC SE staff. However, less than one-third (32%) of respondents strongly agreed that their input is taken seriously by DEC SE staff and less than one-third (30%) believed they had sufficient opportunities to provide input to DEC about SE.
Summary
Each year, SE instructors in New York State provide crucial services to the state and to potential hunters. Findings illustrate that most SE instructors teach more than one SE course per year and have been teaching SE for nearly 20 years. Findings also indicated that most instructors are motivated by a desire to teach hunter safety and to maintain the tradition of hunting. Social relationships play a critical role in respondents’ volunteer experiences and satisfaction. Most instructors’ experiences with other volunteers exceeded their expectations and the majority of respondents were very satisfied with their relationships with other volunteers on their teaching team. Overall, most respondents are satisfied with their volunteer experience and intend to
iii

continue teaching SE in the near future. However, some respondents indicated feeling as if they do not have ample opportunities to provide input to DEC SE staff; others do not believe their input is taken seriously by DEC SE staff.
iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank Department of Environmental Conservation staff members Michael Schiavone, Charles Dente, Kenneth Baginski, Kelly Hamilton, Andrew MacDuff, Melissa Neely, and Michael Wasilco for service on the project contact team. We also appreciate the additional support provided by DEC staff including regional Sportsman Education coordinators. Lastly, we thank all survey respondents who participated in the study. We thank Nancy Connelly and Karlene Smith, of Cornell’s Human Dimensions Research Unit, for contributions to the survey implementation and analysis. This work was supported by Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Grant W-125-S.
v

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary......................................................................................................................... i Background .................................................................................................................................. i Purpose..................................................................................................................................... i Objectives ................................................................................................................................ i Methods........................................................................................................................................ i Key findings................................................................................................................................ ii Summary.................................................................................................................................... iii
Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................... v Table of Contents........................................................................................................................... vi List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. viii Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1
Background ................................................................................................................................. 1 Methods........................................................................................................................................... 6
Survey sampling frame ............................................................................................................... 6 Survey instrument ....................................................................................................................... 6
Measuring motivations and satisfaction.................................................................................. 7 Survey implementation ............................................................................................................... 7 Analysis........................................................................................................................................... 7 Results............................................................................................................................................. 7 Respondent characteristics.......................................................................................................... 7 Role as a DEC SE instructor....................................................................................................... 8 Why do instructors volunteer? .................................................................................................. 10
Sportsman Education/hunting-specific ................................................................................. 10 Personal understanding ......................................................................................................... 10 Social relationships ............................................................................................................... 10 Personal values...................................................................................................................... 10 Instructors’ satisfaction with the SE program....................................................................... 13 Organizational Support ......................................................................................................... 13 Group integration .................................................................................................................. 13 Participation efficacy ............................................................................................................ 14 Empowerment ....................................................................................................................... 14 Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 17 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 19 Literature Cited ............................................................................................................................. 20 Appendix A................................................................................................................................... 21 Study Questionnaire.................................................................................................................. 21 Appendix B ................................................................................................................................... 32 Tables illustrating full scales and subsequent survey responses............................................... 32
vi

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Core SE course instructor qualifications and responsibilities. ......................................... 3 Table 2. Description of volunteer motivations and satisfaction. .................................................... 5 Table 3. Modified Volunteer Process Model (adapted from Snyder & Omato 2008).................... 6 Table 4. Respondents' motivations to teach SE. ........................................................................... 11 Table 5. Training and support: Expectations and experiences. .................................................... 12 Table 6. Internal-team relationships: Expectations and experiences. ........................................... 13 Table 7. Instructors’ satisfaction with the SE program................................................................. 15
vii

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Model of SE instructor recruitment and retention........................................................... 2 Figure 2. Age of current SE instructors. ......................................................................................... 8 Figure 3. Annual course load of SE instructors. ............................................................................. 9 Figure 4. Individuals who helped recruit current SE instructors. ................................................... 9 Figure 5. Current SE instructors’ overall satisfaction with their volunteer experience................ 16 Figure 6. Instructors’ perceptions about their ability to influence the SE program...................... 17
viii

Background

INTRODUCTION

Sportsman education (SE) is required for all for first-time hunters in New York State. Hunter and bowhunter education courses teach students how to be safe, responsible and ethical hunters. Topics covered in the standardized course include: firearm handling and safety techniques, history of firearms, knowledge of firearms and ammunition, proper gun handling and storage, marksmanship fundamentals, specific laws and regulations, principles of wildlife management and wildlife identification, outdoor safety, and hunter ethics and responsibilities (toward wildlife, the environment, landowners and the general public).

Most SE courses are taught by volunteer instructors. The model presented below depicts stages a potential instructor may experience as he or she enters and becomes part of the instructor community (Figure 1). Individuals interested in becoming a SE instructor (“applicant” stage) must be 18 years or older and “have good personality and communication skills” (Table 1). To become a certified SE instructor, applicants must also complete approximately eight hours of instructor training and serve a period of apprenticeship (“apprentice” stage). Volunteers who successfully complete their apprenticeship are eventually certified as SE instructors (“active” instructor stage) by DEC SE staff.

Following certification, instructors are expected to teach at least one SE course per year and attend a refresher course once every two years. Instructors who do not meet these requirements may have their certification temporarily or permanently revoked. After teaching SE education for a minimum of five years, certified active instructors can apply to become Master instructors. Master instructors are responsible for teaching instructor training, conducting refresher courses, and often audit courses to help active instructors improve presentations. Figure 1 illustrates the progression from applicant to certified active instructor. However, it does not imply that every certified active instructor will or should become a Master instructor.

1

Figure 1. Model of SE instructor recruitment and retention. 2

Table 1. Core SE course instructor qualifications and responsibilities.

Types of Qualifications and Training SE Instructors

Responsibilities

Certified active

• At least 18 years old • Possess good communication skills • Hunting experience is preferred • Completed new instructor training course in
area they wish to teach • Completed an apprenticeship • Passed law enforcement
investigation/background check (e.g., Public Registry of Sex Offenders, Environmental Conservation Appearance Ticket)

• Teach/assist in a minimum of one course annually to be considered “active”
• Attend refresher workshop at least once within previous twoyear period to be considered “active”
• Must adhere to all policies and procedures of the SE Program (e.g., course requirements, curriculums, etc.).

Master

• The qualifications and training required of • Provide at least 12 hours of Master instructors are in addition to what is training for prospective SE

required of certified active instructors

instructors

• 5 years of experience as instructor

• Conduct refresher courses for

(additional training and apprenticeship with certified instructors

a certified Master instructor may be

• Audit courses (minimum of one

required)

student course per year) and

• Interviewed by DEC Regional SE

assist instructors to enhance

Coordinator

their teaching/presentation skills

• Possess exceptional communication skills

*Information obtained from NYS DEC Sportsman Education Program, Instructor Manual 2016.

Through their voluntary efforts, SE course instructors provide a significant resource for beginning hunters. There is concern among New York State (NYS) Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) professionals about maintaining sufficient numbers of instructors to meet demand for course offerings across NYS. Their concern is linked to the belief that a decline in the number of SE instructors would result in fewer courses offered each year which would impede hunter recruitment. It is also important to note that active instructors often do not meet the basic requirements for recertification (e.g., teach one course per year, attend one refresher course every two years). These “lapsed” instructors may be more likely to permanently cease volunteering as a SE instructor. It is also possible for Master instructors to lapse as well but this is less common.

3

It is important for wildlife managers to understand whether and to what degree instructors intend to continue teaching SE or cease volunteering altogether.1 Examining factors that influence SE instructors’ behavioral intentions offers a useful starting point to identify instructors’ long-term interest in volunteering with the DEC SE program.
Motivations are cognitive forces which “drive individuals’ interest in activities prior to participation” (Vaske and Manfredo 2012, p. 53). Volunteer motivations help garner interest in a particular activity (or organization/agency) but they also help sustain interest over time (Clary et al. 1998). Thus, understanding SE instructor motivations provides insight into both volunteer recruitment and long-term retention.
Volunteerism serves a variety of functions for both the volunteer and the organization receiving services from the volunteer. Clary et al. (1998) describe six potential functions of volunteerism: expression of values, personal understanding, social relationships, career-related benefits, protective purposes, and enhancement (Table 2, upper portion). The authors also provide evidence of the role motivations play in determining future intentions. According to the authors, individuals whose experiences aligned with their motivation to volunteer, were more satisfied overall and more likely to continue volunteering in the future.
As the point above illustrates, there is a strong correlation between volunteer satisfaction and intention to continue volunteering. Individuals who are more satisfied tend to volunteer for longer periods of time than those who are dissatisfied. Thus, satisfaction represents an evaluative outcome associated with one’s experiences. Specifically, it is determined by “the degree to which desired outcomes are fulfilled or unfulfilled” by the experience (Schreyer and Roggenbuck 1978). Galindo-Kuhn and Guzley (2001) identified four components of volunteer satisfaction (Table 2, lower portion), three of which (i.e., participation efficacy, group integration, and empowerment) were significant predictors of volunteers’ intention to continue providing services in the future.
1 This report is part of a larger study of volunteer SE instructors in New York State. The findings presented here focus exclusively on active SE instructors. Additional studies were conducted to understand why SE instructors temporarily (or permanently) cease volunteering activities.
4

Table 2. Description of volunteer motivations and satisfaction.

Motivationsa

Description

Values

The ability for volunteers to express their own altruistic values through the

volunteer experience

Understanding The ability for volunteers to share and gain knowledge while volunteering

Social

The ability to spend time with friends or others while volunteering

Career

The ability to create or enhance one’s professional goals through volunteering

Protective

The ability to overcome personal guilt about being “more fortunate than others”

Enhancement The ability to enhance personal growth and self-esteem through volunteering Satisfactionb

Organizational Educational and emotional resources provided to volunteers

support

Participation Belief that one’s volunteer work is benefiting others

efficacy

Empowerment Self-expression associated with one’s role as a volunteer

Group

Social relationships volunteers develop with other volunteers and paid staff

integration

aClary et al. (1998) bGalindo-Kuhn and Guzley (2001)

Purpose:

The purpose of this study is to identify the motivations, expectations, experiences, and satisfaction of active SE instructors at different stages in the volunteer process and across different types of SE instructors (Table 1). The volunteer process model (Table 3) provides a useful framework to identify these attributes and to explore to what degree individual attributes (e.g., motivations), interpersonal-relationships (e.g., with other volunteers), and organizational factors (e.g., organizational support from DEC SE staff), influence instructors to continue teaching SE (Snyder & Omato 2008).

Objectives:

1. Describe SE instructors’ motivations to teach SE, expectations about teaching SE prior to volunteering with the program, and experiences as a volunteer instructor.

2. Examine the degree to which SE instructors are satisfied with their volunteer experience and for how long they intend to continue teaching SE.

5

Table 3. Modified Volunteer Process Model (adapted from Snyder & Omato 2008).

Levels of Analysis Individual
Interpersonal/ Social Group
Agency/ Organization

Stages of the Volunteer Process

Antecedents

Experiences

Consequences

(Active & Master

(Active & Master

(Active & Master

instructors)

instructors)

instructors)

Personality,

Satisfaction, stigma,

Knowledge and attitude

motivation, life

organizational

change, health (as result

circumstances, desired integration, perceptions of volunteering)

identity

of their own work

Perspectives on group Perspectives on the

Perspectives on the

memberships, norms relationships between composition of their

volunteers and their

social network,

students

relationship development,

connection to community

(e.g., with other

instructors, local

community members, and

DEC staff)

Perspectives on

Perspectives on

Perspectives on volunteer

recruitment

organizational culture, retention (personally and

strategies/training

volunteer placement

as result of organizational

framework),

acknowledgment of

services

Survey sampling frame

METHODS

Data on active SE instructors were collected using a mail survey instrument. We identified potential respondents using DEC SE regional coordinator databases. Each database was comprised of active and Master instructors who had taught at least one SE course in the previous 12 months and attended one refresher course in the previous two years. However, individuals lacking contact information (e.g., mailing address, telephone number) were removed from the sampling frame. The final sample included 2,126 SE instructors.

Survey instrument

The questionnaire, titled “Teaching Sportsman Education in New York State: Insights from Instructors”, was comprised of questions spanning instructor recruitment, motivations to teach SE, expectations about teaching SE, experiences and overall satisfaction with the SE program (see Appendix A for full questionnaire). The survey instrument received approval from the Cornell University Institutional Review Board for Human Participants (protocol number: 1006001472) prior to implementation.

6

Measuring motivations and satisfaction
Instructor motivations were measured using 13 items adapted from Clary et al. (1998) and Snydor and Omato (2008). They represented four potential dimensions of SE instructor motivations (e.g., personal values). We also included five items specifically about SE and hunting. All items were measured on a 4-point, Likert scale from 1 (not at all important) to 4 (very important).
We measured instructors’ satisfaction using two questions. The first question included 15 items used to measure each of the four dimensions identified by Galindo-Kuhn and Guzley (2001) (Table 2). Each was modified to include terms and phrases relevant to SE instructors (e.g., my relationship with volunteer instructors outside my teaching team). The second question was an overall measure of instructor satisfaction (Figure 5). Both questions were measured on a 5-point, Likert scale from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied).
Survey implementation
Survey implementation occurred during March 2016 and followed a 4-wave mailing procedure. An invitation to participate and an initial questionnaire were mailed to potential respondents on March 2, 2016. A reminder was mailed to all nonrespondents one week later (March 9). A second questionnaire was mailed on March 23, followed by a final reminder on March 30.
Staff at the Cornell University Survey Research Institute (SRI) conducted 100 telephone interviews with survey nonrespondents to address potential nonresponse bias.
ANALYSIS
Statistical analyses were conducting using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (IBM SPSS 23). Independent samples t-tests and Chi square tests were used to examine potential differences between respondents and nonrespondents with respect to year of certification, number of courses taught per year, age, behavioral intention, overall satisfaction, experiences, where courses are taught (by DEC administrative region), ability to influence the program, current role as a volunteer, and race/ethnicity. Differences between comparison groups are reported at the p < 0.05 level of significance.
RESULTS
In total, 1,394 questionnaires were returned. Sixty-one questionnaires were returned as undeliverable, resulting in 1,333 usable responses and a 67.5% response rate. No statistically significant differences were detected between respondents and nonrespondents.
Respondent characteristics
Nearly all respondents were male (95.7%) and White/Caucasian (94.7%). The mean age of respondents was 62 years old. About one third (30.1%) were between the age of 55 and 64 years old (Figure 2). Nearly one-fifth (19.7%) received some high school education or obtained a high
7

school diploma/G.E.D. About half (47.8%) received some college/technical school training or an Associate’s degree. One-third (32.5%) received a Bachelor’s, graduate or professional degree.

Respondents' Age
40 34.4
30.1
30

% 20 10

7.2

17.7

10.6

0 < 45 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74 >74
Years Old (mean = 62)

Figure 2. Age of current SE instructors.

Role as a DEC SE instructor
The vast majority of respondents were certified active instructors (89.6%). Overall, respondents have been certified to teach SE for a mean of 19 years. More respondents teach Hunter Education (92.4%) than Bow (63.0%), Trapping (8.1%), and Waterfowl (5.1%) Education courses. More than half (59.3%) teach Hunter Education and one additional SE course. On average, instructors teach three SE courses during a 12 month period (mean) (Figure 3). However, about half (53.2%) teach less than three courses. The majority of respondents teach with the same group of instructors (89.8%) and have done so for a mean of 11 years.

8

Number of SE Courses Taught Annually

40 35 30 25 % 20 15 10 5 0

17.9
1

35.3

15.4 12.9 10.0

8.6

2 3 4 5 to 6 Number of Courses

7 or more

Figure 3. Annual course load of SE instructors.

Respondents were recruited to teach SE primarily by people who already were instructors, but many were influenced by friends and family members. In contrast, few were recruited by DEC SE staff (Figure 4). May respondents were recruited or influenced to teach SE by more than one category of recruitment influence.

Instructor Recruitment

Certified instructor Close friend
Master instructor Family member DEC SE staff
0

56.8 52.1 34.8 30.5
20 40 60
% Checked ("Yes")

Figure 4. Individuals who helped recruit current SE instructors.

74.0
80

9

Why do instructors volunteer? Understanding why SE instructors voluntarily teach SE in New York State is useful for identifying ways to recruit new instructors and offers insight into whether current instructors intend to continue volunteering in the future.
Sportsman Education/hunting-specific The majority of respondents volunteer because of an interest in hunting and specifically, in the SE program (Table 4). For example, teaching others how to be safe hunters and maintaining the tradition of hunting were very important to nearly all (97.8 and 91.2%) respondents, respectively (see Appendix B for complete set of responses to motivation items). Over two-thirds (69.0%) teach SE because they are interested in ensuring the program continues.
Personal understanding Less than half (43.5%) of respondents volunteer to continue learning about SE. One-third (33.6%) teach SE to continue developing their own skills as a hunter.
Social relationships Overall, few respondents are motivated to teach SE because of social influence. For example, only 11.1% of respondents volunteer because the people closest to them volunteer and 10.0% indicated that they teach SE because those closest to them want them to.
Personal values Most respondents volunteer specifically because of their personal values, convictions and beliefs (81.5%), and two-thirds (65.1%) do so because they enjoy helping other people. Half (50.7%) of respondents teach SE because they feel a personal obligation to help others.
10

Table 4. Respondents' motivations to teach SE.

Motivations

Means for % Very Cronbach’s individual important alpha**

items

Sportsman Education/hunting-specific

(mean = 3.6)*

To teach others how to be safe hunters

3.97 97.8

To maintain the tradition of hunting

3.89 91.2

Because of my interest in keeping the SE program going

3.59

69.0

To feel like I’m contributing to wildlife management

3.58 67.7

Because I enjoy teaching SE

3.43 57.5

0.60

Personal understanding (mean = 2.9)*

To continue to learn about SE

3.46 43.5

Because volunteering lets me learn through direct, hands- 3.01

38.9

on experience

To continue to develop my skills as a hunter

2.78 33.6

0.80

Social relationships (mean = 1.8)*

Because the people closest to me volunteer

1.95 11.1

Because the people I’m close to want me to volunteer

1.83 10.0 0.65***

Personal values (mean = 3.5)*

Because of my personal values, convictions, and beliefs

3.78

81.5

Because I enjoy helping other people

3.58 65.1

I feel an obligation to help others

3.29 50.7

0.60

*Indicates the overall mean of items within a specific construct. All items were measured using a

5-point, Likert scale from 1 (Not at all important) to 5 (Very important).

**Cronbach’s alpha measures the internal consistency (and scale reliability) of items. ***Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) is statistically significant at p ≤ 0.01.

Training and support: Instructor expectations and experiences.
Specific expectations about instructor training and teaching apprenticeship commitments varied. About half (51.6%) of respondents expected to receive excellent instruction during the new instructor training and 53.5% expected to have access to teaching materials following instructor training (percentages represent strong agreement) (Table 5). About one-quarter (27.9%) expected to have help finding other volunteers with whom they could teach SE. Less than half (41.0%) expected to complete an apprenticeship after only assisting with a few classes (see Appendix B for complete set of responses to expectation and experience items).
Some respondents’ experiences did not live up to their expectations especially those dealing with instructor training, being able to access teaching materials, and the length of time it took to be certified (Table 5). For example, only 38.9% were able to access a variety of teaching materials following instructor training. Additionally, 38.9% indicated that getting certified took much longer than expected.

11

Table 5. Training and support: Expectations and experiences.

% Strongly agree

Expectation items

Experience items

Expectation* Experience*

Expected to have access to

I was able to access a variety

53.3

38.7

teaching materials after

of teaching materials

training

Expected to receive excellent Instruction I received was 51.4 47.8

instruction during training

excellent

Expected to complete the

My apprenticeship lasted

40.9 34.5

apprenticeship after a few

much longer than I

classes

expected**

Expected to be certified within Getting certified took much

34.7

38.9

a few weeks of completing

longer than I thought**

apprenticeship

Expected to have help finding I had limited help finding

27.8 23.2

other volunteers with whom I other instructors with whom I

could teach

could teach**

*All items were measured using a 5-point, Likert scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly

agree)

**Items were reverse coded during analysis.

Internal-team relationships: Instructor expectations and experiences.
Overall, respondents’ incoming expectations about teaching SE and about teaching SE with other volunteers were positive (Table 6). For example, 74.2% expected to enjoy teaching SE courses with other instructors and 67.7% expected to get along with other instructors on their teaching team (percentages represent strong agreement). Many instructors’ experiences teaching SE exceeded their expectations. For example, 83.0% of respondents enjoyed teaching SE with other instructors and 84.2% get along well with other instructors on their teaching team (see Appendix B for complete set of responses to expectation and experience items).

12

Table 6. Internal-team relationships: Expectations and experiences.

% Strongly agree

Expectation items

Experience items

Expectation* Experience*

Expected to enjoy teaching SE I enjoy teaching with the

74.2 83.0

with other instructors

instructors on my team

Expected to teach SE with

The other instructors on my

67.9

72.9

other very qualified insturcotrs team are very good at teaching

Expected to get along well

I get along well with other

67.7

84.2

with other instructors

instructors on my team

Expected to be very good at I have become a very good 64.5 58.4

teaching SE

instructor

Expected to be able to teach I am able to teach the topics

50.8

65.7

the topics that most interest me that most interest me

*All items were measured using a 5-point, Likert scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly

agree).

Instructors’ satisfaction with the SE program

The degree to which volunteers are satisfied with their experience influences the likelihood they will continue volunteering in the future (Gidron 1984), however satisfaction can be related to different aspects of the experience (Hendee 1974). Thus, rather than relying on just overall satisfaction, we report on four dimensions of satisfaction: organizational support, group integration, participatory efficacy, and empowerment.

Organizational Support

Both educational support (e.g., ability to access resources necessary to accomplish volunteer tasks) and emotional support (e.g., being acknowledged for your work) influence volunteer satisfaction (Table 7). Nearly two-thirds (62.0%) of respondents were very satisfied with the support they receive from DEC SE staff and half (50.2%) were very satisfied with their ability to obtain educational materials needed to teach a SE course (e.g., videos, PowerPoint presentations). However, only one-third (33.5%) of respondents were very satisfied with the frequency with which their work is acknowledged by DEC SE staff and 29.8% were very satisfied with the frequency in which they are provided feedback about their volunteer efforts (see Appendix B for complete set of responses to satisfaction items).

Group integration

Developing positive social relationships with other volunteers and paid SE staff is a critical component of volunteer retention. More (81.8%) respondents were very satisfied with their relationship with team members than any other aspect of the SE program. Over half (56.7%) were very satisfied with their relationship with DEC SE staff and 46.7% were very satisfied with their relationship with other instructors outside their teaching team. Few (29.0%) respondents were satisfied with the amount of time they spend with DEC staff.

13

Participation efficacy It is important for volunteers to believe their effort is making a difference and to be able to successfully accomplish work assignments. Most respondents were very satisfied with their ability to effectively teach SE (68.7%) and 65.7% were very satisfied with the difference their work is making.
Empowerment More than half of all respondents were satisfied with their role as a SE instructor. For example, 64.2% were very satisfied with the opportunity they have to utilize their knowledge/skills while volunteering and 57.6% indicated they were very satisfied with the freedom to choose how to carry out their volunteer assignments.
14

Table 7. Instructors’ satisfaction with the SE program.

Volunteer Satisfaction

Means for individual

Percent “very satisfied”

Cronbach’s alpha

items

Organizational support (mean = 3.9)*

The support I receive from DEC SE staff

4.4

62.0

My ability to get educational materials

4.1

50.2

How often DEC SE staff acknowledge

3.7

33.5

the work I do

The frequency with which I’m provided

3.6

29.8 0.83

feedback

Group integration (mean = 4.2)*

My relationship with instructors on my

4.7

81.8

team

My relationship with DEC SE staff

4.2 56.7

My relationships with instructors outside

4.1

46.7

my team

The amount of time spent with DEC staff

3.7

29.0 0.70

Participation efficacy (mean = 4.3)*

My ability to do this job well

4.6 68.7

The difference my volunteer work is

4.5

65.7

making

The opportunities I have to learn new

4.0

38.3 0.62

things about SE

Empowerment (mean = 4.3)*

The chance I have to utilize my

4.5 64.2

knowledge/skills

The freedom to decide how to carry out

4.3

57.6

my volunteer assignment(s)

My freedom to teach SE how I choose

4.1

51.5 0.74

*Indicates the overall mean of items within a specific construct. All items were measured using a

5-point, Likert scale from 1 (Very dissatisfied) to 5 (Very satisfied).

Instructors’ overall satisfaction and behavioral intentions
Most (62.5%) respondents were very satisfied with their volunteer experience. Nearly onequarter (21.4%) indicated they were somewhat satisfied (Figure 5). Less than one-tenth were very dissatisfied. The majority intend to continue volunteering as a SE instructor in the next year (79.2%) and 69.0% intend to teach SE for as long as they are able to do so.

15

70 60 50 40 % 30 20 10
0

Respondents' Satisfaction
21.4 9.2
4.1 2.9 Very Somewhat Neither Somewhat dissatisfied dissatisfied dissatisfied satisfied
nor satisfied

62.5
Very satisfied

Figure 5. Current SE instructors’ overall satisfaction with their volunteer experience.

Instructor perceptions about their ability to influence the SE program
Two-thirds (66.8%) of respondents believe that input from SE instructors would improve the SE program and more than half (59.4%) are comfortable sharing their opinions about the program with DEC SE staff (percentages represent only strong agreement). However, only 32.7% believe their input is taken seriously by DEC SE staff and fewer (30.1%) feel as if they have ample opportunity to provide input to DEC (Figure 6).

16

SE Instructors Ability To Influence SE

Input from instructors would lead to a better SE program
I am comfortable voicing my opinion about issues/concerns about the SE
program
I believe my input is taken seriously by DEC SE staff

66.8 59.4 32.7

I have enough opportunities to provide input to DEC on SE

30.1

0 20 40 60 80
% (Strongly Agree)

Figure 6. Instructors’ perceptions about their ability to influence the SE program.

Discussion
Volunteer SE instructors in New York provide a critical service to the state. Each year, approximately 2,700 instructors teach 1,500 SE courses to over 45,000 potential hunters (Chuck Dente, personal communication 2016). These individuals play an important role in hunter recruitment yet information about their motivations, experiences, and satisfaction is limited. This study attempted to identify why current instructors teach SE courses in New York State, what types of experiences they have had as SE volunteers, and the degree to which they are satisfied with their volunteer experience. Findings indicate that on average, volunteer instructors have been teaching SE for nearly 20 years and intend to continue doing so for the foreseeable future. Most instructors are motivated by a personal desire to maintain the tradition of hunting in New York and to teach hunters how to be safe while afield. Findings also suggest that personal relationships are a critical component of instructor satisfaction and that overall, most instructors were satisfied with their volunteer experience.
One of the primary objectives of this study was to identify characteristics of SE instructors and in doing so, more accurately describe who is teaching SE in New York State. Findings reveal very limited race/ethnic and gender diversity among SE instructors. Almost all respondents were Caucasian males. SE instructors are also much older than volunteers working in other sectors. Over one-third of SE instructors were between 65 and 74 years old and an additional 10% were 75 years of age or older. According to the Corporation for National and Community Service, approximately 13% of all volunteers in the U.S. are between 65 and 74 years old (Corporation
17

for National and Community Service, n.d.). Clearly, the age structure within the SE program is skewed toward older adults.
Reinforcing the current volunteer base with new instructors and recruiting individuals from younger age classes, including women and individuals with more diverse backgrounds will help foster the sustainability of the SE program. However, findings illustrate that volunteers are predominantly recruited by other instructors and close friends which raises questions about instructor recruitment. First, to what degree are current instructors actively recruiting new volunteers? Second, who are they targeting in their recruitment efforts (e.g., young vs. older individuals) and how are they identifying potential volunteers (e.g., individuals from within or outside their social network)? Lastly, to what extent does DEC need to complement recruitment efforts of current instructors targeting those traits current volunteers are less likely to reach? Answering these questions has long-term implications for the SE program.
A second objective of this study was to understand why current SE instructors volunteer to teach SE, knowledge that can be useful in retaining them as instructors. Findings indicate that more instructors teach SE because of reasons specifically related to hunting than for personal gain (e.g., personal understanding) or because they feel social pressure to volunteer (e.g., social relationships). The desire to maintain the tradition of hunting and to teach hunter safety were very important motivations for instructors in our sample. Another very important motivation to volunteer was personal values, convictions, and beliefs.
Together, the three most important motivations described above (e.g., to maintain the tradition of hunting, etc.) likely constitute the primary goals instructors seek from their volunteer experience. The remaining motivations (e.g., because I enjoy teaching) may play more of a secondary or supporting role. In other words, the latter may be attained simply by volunteering with the SE program; while the former continue to drive instructors’ interests and intentions. Future research should consider how the magnitude of specific instructor motivations influences both recruitment and retention of SE volunteers.
Personal relationships play an important role throughout the entire volunteer process and contribute to volunteers’ perceived satisfaction. The majority of respondents were recruited by active instructors and close friends, indicating pre-existing relationships between potential volunteers and individuals familiar with or actively volunteering for the SE program. Instructor expectations about internal-team dynamics also illustrates the importance of personal relationships. Prior to volunteering, most instructors’ expected to enjoy teaching SE with what they believed to be other, very qualified instructors. After they began teaching SE with other instructors, most respondents’ experiences exceeded their expectations. Overall, respondents were most satisfied with internal-team relationships than they were with other aspects of the SE program (e.g., training and organizational support). Given instructors’ positive experiences and level of satisfaction with instructors on their teaching team it is not surprising that the majority have taught with the same group of instructors for more than 10 years.
This inquiry revealed that most SE instructors are largely satisfied with their volunteer experience. However, findings also illustrate that respondents’ experiences may be improved if DEC SE staff better acknowledge and provide feedback about the way volunteers teach SE.
18

When volunteers believe their work is making a difference they are more likely to continue volunteering (Pearce 1983). Volunteers also need to have confidence in their ability to successfully carry out tasks (Wharton 1999). This involves having access to the appropriate tools, supplies, and other materials needed to provide a service. Following instructor training, most volunteers expected to have access to teaching materials but their experiences indicate that some did not. This unmet expectation may create a discordance between instructors and SE staff. Additionally, many respondents believed input from instructors would enhance the SE program yet many feel they do not have ample opportunities to provide feedback and that their input is not taken seriously by DEC SE staff. These issues do not appear to be influencing instructors’ decision to continue teaching SE but they may indicate potential areas of future conflict between volunteers and DEC SE staff. However, it is important to note that our sample only contained currently active volunteers. It is possible that these issues have affected instructors who no longer teach SE in New York State.
Conclusion
Commitment to SE course instruction runs high among current volunteer instructors. They have offered volunteer instruction for many years and find the activity rewarding at several levels and in multiple ways. Our results indicate their experience could be enhanced further if they had additional opportunities to interact with DEC staff where two-way communication of ideas for course improvement (primarily to DEC) and expressions of appreciation for service (from DEC), as well as forms of material support for instruction, were improved.
Current instructors are the primary recruiters for additional instructors; however, the likelihood is that they are apt to replace volunteers with new instructors similar to themselves with respect to backgrounds and motivations for volunteering as an SE instructor. That means additional recruitment effort, perhaps mostly by the DEC or individuals retained to serve as their “agents” (e.g., external marketing firms) is needed to expand age, gender, geographic and other demographic diversity present in the SE instructor population of the future.
Clearly a strong base exists from which additional SE instructor support could be built. On one hand, actions that are likely to increase instructor satisfaction are relatively straightforward (e.g., increased opportunities for instructors to provide feedback about the SE program). On the other hand, it may take some innovative actions to reach more diverse potential instructors including: younger people, women, and non-Caucasian individuals. It certainly will require out-of-the-box efforts to cultivate potential instructors from segments of the hunting population that have not been active as SE instructors in the past. The challenges notwithstanding, novel efforts can be designed to ensure the vitality of the SE program going forward.
19

LITERATURE CITED
Clary, E. G., Snyder, M., Ridge, R. D., Copeland, J., Stukas, A. A., Haugen, J., and Miene, P. (1998). Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1516-1530.
Corporation for National and Community Service. (n.d.) Retrieved from: www.volunteeringinamerica.gov/
Galindo-Kuhn, R. and Guzley, R. M. (2001). The volunteer satisfaction index: Construct definition, measurement, development, and validation. Journal of Social Service Research, 28(1), 45-68.
Gidron, B. (1984). Predictors of retention and turnover among service volunteer workers. Journal of Social Service Research, 8, 1–16.
Hendee, J. C. (1974). A Multiple-Satisfaction Approach to Game Management. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 2(3), 104-113.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Sportsman Education Program (n.d.). Instructor’s handbook: Teacher tips, guidance and procedures. Retrieved from http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/9189.html
Pearce, J. L. (1983). Job attitude and motivation differences between volunteers and employees from comparable organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 646-652.
Schreyer, R. and Roggenbuck, J. W. (1978). The influence of experience expectations on crowding perceptions and social-psychological carrying capacities. Leisure Sciences, 1(4), 373-394.
Snyder, M. and A. M Omoto. (2008). Volunteerism: Social Issues Perspectives and Social Policy Implications. Social Issues and Policy Review, 2(1): 1 – 36.
Vaske, J. J. and Manfredo, M. J. (2012). Social psychological considerations in wildlife management. In Decker, D. J., Riley, S. J., and Siemer, W. F. (Eds.), Human Dimensions of Wildlife Management (14 pp.). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Wharton, C. S. (1991). Why can’t we be friends? Expectations versus experiences in the volunteer role. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 20, 79-106.
20

Study Questionnaire

APPENDIX A

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

APPENDIX B Tables illustrating full scales and subsequent survey responses.

Motivations
Sportsman Education/huntingspecifica (mean = 3.6)* To teach others how to be safe hunters To maintain the tradition of hunting Because of my interest in keeping the SE program going To feel like I’m contributing to wildlife management Because I enjoy teaching SE Personal understanding (mean = 2.9)* To continue to learn about SE Because volunteering lets me learn through direct, hands-on experience To continue to develop my skills as a hunter Social relationships (mean = 1.89)* Because the people closest to me volunteer Because the people I’m close to want me to volunteer Personal values (mean = 3.5)* Because of my personal values, convictions, and beliefs Because I enjoy helping other people I feel an obligation to help others

Means for individual
items
3.97 3.89 3.59 3.58 3.43
3.46 3.01 2.78
1.95 1.83
3.78 3.58 3.29

Not at all Slightly Moderately Very important important important important

0.2 0.1 0.3 1.3 1.4 6.9 1.6 6.5 3.3 8.0
5.4 16.6 9.5 19.1 16.4 23.2
46.4 23.3 51.7 23.2
0.6 2.6 1.0 5.3 5.2 11.3

1.9 97.8 7.2 91.2 27.7 69.0 24.2 67.7 31.3 57.5
34.6 43.5 32.4 38.9 26.8 33.6
19.2 11.1 15.1 10.0
15.3 81.5 28.5 65.1 32.7 50.7

32

Volunteer Satisfaction
Organizational support (mean = 3.9)* The support I receive from DEC SE staff My ability to get educational materials How often DEC SE staff acknowledge the work I do The frequency with which I’m provided feedback Group integration (mean = 4.2)* My relationship with instructors on my team My relationship with DEC SE staff My relationships with instructors outside my team The amount of time spent with DEC staff Participation efficacy (mean = 4.3)* My ability to do this job well The difference my volunteer work is making The opportunities I have to learn new things about SE Empowerment (mean = 4.3)* The chance I have to utilize my knowledge/skills The freedom to decide how to carry out my volunteer assignment(s) My freedom to teach SE how I choose

Means for individual
items 4.4 4.1 3.7 3.6
4.7 4.2 4.1 3.7
4.6 4.5 4.0
4.5 4.3 4.1

Very dissatisfied
1.7 2.8 6.7 3.2
0.2 2.3 0.9 3.1
0.5 0.3 1.0
0.8 2.2 3.2

Somewhat dissatisfied
4.1 8.7 6.7 8.1
0.9 3.6 1.7 7.5
0.6 1.1 4.6
1.4 3.1 5.0

Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
8.7 14.6 28.6 35.8
4.6 16.0 25.1 34.2
5.7 9.4 22.1
8.2 11.7 14.0

Somewhat satisfied
23.4 23.9 24.4 23.1
12.5 21.4 25.6 26.1
24.4 23.5 33.9
25.4 25.4 26.3

Very satisfied
62.0 50.2 33.5 29.8
81.8 56.7 46.7 29.0
68.7 65.7 38.3
64.2 57.6 51.5

33

Expectations (I expected to…)
Receive excellent instruction during training Have access to teaching materials after training Have help finding other volunteers with whom I could teach Complete the apprenticeship after a few classes Be certified within a few weeks of completing apprenticeship
Get along well with other instructors Be able to teach the topics that most interest me
Be very good at teaching SE Teach SE with other very qualified instructors
Enjoy teaching SE with other instructors

Strongly disagree
1.1

Slightly disagree
2.2

Neither disagree nor agree
18.0

Slightly Strongly agree agree
27.1 51.6

1.4 3.1 15.1 26.8 53.5

3.0 4.5 34.8 29.8 27.9

4.2 3.4 22.6 28.7 41.0

7.0 6.1 28.4 23.6 34.8

0.5 0.8

9.3 21.7 67.7

1.6 1.6 16.9 29.2 50.8 0.4 0.8 11.8 22.5 64.5

0.3 0.9 0.5 0.6

8.7 22.2 67.9 5.3 19.4 74.2

Experiences
Instruction I received was excellent I was able to access a variety of teaching materials I had limited help finding other instructors with whom I could teach My apprenticeship lasted much longer than I expected Getting certified took much longer than I thought I get along well with other instructors on my team I am able to teach the topics that most interest me
I have become a very good instructor The other instructors on my team are very good at teaching I enjoy teaching with the instructors on my team

Strongly disagree
1.8

Slightly disagree
4.8

Neither disagree nor agree
18.0

Slightly Strongly agree agree
27.6 47.9

2.4 7.0 19.6 32.1 38.9

9.8 17.9 35.5 13.6 23.2

7.5 7.7 32.5 17.7 34.5

9.6 8.2 26.9 16.4 38.9

0.6 0.3 3.5 11.4 84.2

1.2 0.9 10.5 21.7 65.7 0.2 0.7 15.2 25.6 58.4

0.5 1.1 5.9 19.7 72.9

0.5 0.6 3.8 12.1 83.0

34

Influencing program I have enough opportunities to provide input to DEC on SE I believe my input is taken seriously by DEC SE staff I am comfortable voicing my opinion about issues/concerns about the SE program Input from instructors would lead to a better SE program

Strongly disagree
9.1 9.5 2.4 1.3

Neither Slightly disagree disagree nor agree
10.4 24.5
9.8 24.3
4.8 13.2
1.1 8.9

Slightly Strongly agree agree 26.0 30.0 23.9 32.5 20.6 59.1 22.0 66.7

35