COUNSELING
CENTER
UNIVERSITY
0F MARYLAND
COLLEGE
PARK, MARYLAND
THE
VOLUNTEER POTENTIAL OF FIRST-TIME ENTERING STUDENTS:
INTEREST
AREAS AND INCENTIVES
Victoria
J. Balenger and William E. Sedlacek
Research
Report # 4-90
This
research project was supported by the Counseling Center in cooperation with the
Orientation Office, University of Maryland, College Park. Computer time was
provided by the Computer Science Center, University of Maryland, College Park.
Portions of this paper were presented at the 1990 Maryland Student Affairs
Conference, University of Maryland, College Park.
COUNSELING
CENTER
UNIVERSITY
OF MARYLAND
COLLEGE
PARK. MARYLAND
THE
VOLUNTEER POTENTIAL OF FIRST-TIME ENTERING STUDENTS:
INTEREST
AREAS AND INCENTIVES
Victoria
J. Balenger and William E. Sedlacek
Research
Report # 4-90
Summary
First-time entering students at
University of Maryland, College Park were given a survey assessing their
interest in various campus volunteer opportunities. The relationship between
incentives and volunteer interest was also studied. The findings suggested that
generally, students did not differentiate among "serving as a
volunteer", "earning course credit as a volunteer", and
"earning a monetary award as a volunteer".
Overall, students were most interested in
volunteering for the Homecoming Committee and Maryland Images (a campus
recruitment organization), and least interested in volunteering for the
Counseling Center and the Health Center. It appears that first-time
entering students may be most interested in high visibility volunteer positions
concerned with promoting the University. That such positions offer the
opportunity to interact and possibly socialize with a lot of other people may
make them especially appealing to new students.
The
Volunteer Potential of First-time Entering Students:
Interest
Areas and Incentives
Orientation
programs for first-time entering students tend to emphasize WHAT THE
CAMPUS CAN DO FOR YOU - how various programs, services, and facilities
can be used to one's best advantage. Learning to "negotiate the
system" at an institution of higher education is indeed an education in
itself. As student affairs professionals, we must do all we can to facilitate
this process, especially given the evidence that use of campus programs and facilities
is related to retention (astin, 1975, 1977; Mallinckrodt & Sedlacek, 1987;
Tinto, 1975).
As we encourage students to avail
them=selves of the myriad of resources on campus, however, we sometimes forget
to focus also on
WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR THE CAMPUS. While this
is beginning to sound like a presidential speech, it does reflect the growing
sentiment
among educators that volunteerism is an
essential part of the college education (University presidents urged..., 1986).
Accordingly, Delve, Mintz, and Stewart
(1987) developed a model of volunteer service learning with the following goal:
Resulting from a values education fostered
by service learning experiences, students will move from an egocentric to a
more allocentric viewpoint, thereby being able to accept greater responsibility
for their immediate community and the larger society.... (p. 4)
To maximize the "volunteer
potential" of first-time entering students, we need to understand
their interests and motivations. For example, the trend toward vocationalism
among students of recent years (Garland, 1985; Parker, 1988; Study Group...,
1984) suggests that they might prefer volunteer positions that are likely to promote
their career aspirations. Garland (1985) cited evidence that students are
selecting information-intensive, well-paying professional fields,
such as business, law, and engineering (Upcraft, Finney, & Garland, 1984)
over people-oriented careers and traditional fields in the arts,
humanities, and pure sciences (Astir, 1984; Astir & others, 1984). Research
addressing the question of which volunteer opportunities are most attractive to
new students can aid the efforts of student affairs professionals charged with
recruitment.
While the specific volunteer interests of
first-time entering students clearly deserve our attention, perhaps our
greatest concern is that they might not get involved at all. Some writers
(e.g., Blackburn, 1986; Parker, 1988) have observed that students are
becoming.more difficult to attract to leadership positions, and the overall
success of organized campus activities seems to have ebbed. Parker (1988)
suggested that students might be more likely to volunteer with the following
incentives:
(1) course credit for campus volunteers
(2) extra credit in regular courses for
campus volunteers
(3) required volunteer involvement as part
of a regular course
(4) some form of payment for campus
volunteers.
According to Miller (1987), leadership
programs that award academic credit, or are at least documented on a co-curricular
transcript, earn more respect and credibility than those that do not. With
regard to payment for volunteers, Ellis (1985) suggested that the following
research questions need to be answered:
3
What is the effect of giving money--in
any quantity--on volunteering? Is it more than an
"enabling" factor? Does it provide recognition? TS it received as a
form of "earnings" by the volunteer and/or is it seen as such by
salaried staff? When do "enabling funds" become a "stipend"
and when does a "stipend" become a "salary", and does the
level of money involved affect the volunteer work provided? (p. 13)
A 1988 survey of Association of College
Unions - International (ACU-I) members found that, in 36% of the
Union=_ represented, program board members received compensation (Miller &
Galey, 1988). However, the effect of academic credit or stipends on student
volunteer involvement has received little empirical attention, perhaps because
the notion of offering incentives to volunteer seems incongruous. There are, in
fact, a number of practical and philosophical reasons why offering incentives
or compensation to volunteers may be problematic. Parker (1988) noted that many
campus departments do not have it in their budgets to pay student volunteers.
When the money is available, the practice of paying volunteers may serve to
limit the number of student volunteers that can be accommodated. If course
credit is offered, it is inevitable that the volunteer program will attract
some students who have no intrinsic motivation to volunteer. Generally, the
"social interest" (Adler, 1964) value of campus volunteerism may be
compromised if any type of incentive or compensation is offered. Pearce (1983)
compared the attitudes of volunteers and workers for pay in similar
organizations and found that volunteers reported greater social and service
motivation than did their paid counterparts. While it is most lively that the
difference was based on the divergent motivations people have for volunteering
versus seeking a paid position (Boatman, 1987), the volunteer experience itself
may actually foster social interest.
A final consideration is that student
volunteers stand to lose power and autonomy as they become accountable to these
who pay their stipend=_ or award them course grade=_ for their involvement. It
is not difficult to anticipate how a student government association officer may
find his or her effectiveness as an advocate for students compromised by a
stipend from the administration.
After establishing some of the reasons why
it might not be desirable to offer campus volunteers academic credit or
stipends, we must recognize that it may be in everyone's best interest to do
so. If students really cannot afford to donate their time and energy, the
supply of campus volunteers will dwindle. Campus departments whose operations
depend on volunteers will suffer, as will the many individuals who utilize the
services of campus volunteers. Perhaps those with the most to lose are the
students who cannot or will not volunteer with no incentive: campus
volunteerism presents a unique developmental opportunity that may never again
present itself after the college years are over.
While student affairs professionals must be
prepared to grapple with the many issues around volunteer incentives and
compensation, empirical research can facilitate informed decision making in
this area. The purpose of this study was two-fold:
(1) To assess interest in specific
volunteer opportunities among first-time entering students.
(2) To assess the degree to which level of
interest in specific volunteer opportunities is influenced by the incentives of
a monetary award or course credit.
Method
Participants were 917 randomly sampled
incoming students attending summer orientation at a large, eastern university.
More than 90% of incoming students attend orientation each year.
Participants were randomly assigned to one
of three forms of the "Campus Involvement Interest Survey" (CIIS),
which was patterned after the Situational Attitude Scale (Schwalb &
Sedlacek, 1990; Sedlacek & Brooks, 1972). On the CIIS, students were asked
to rate on a five-point Likert scale their level of interest in each of eight campus
volunteer opportunities. The three forms were identical, except that the first
referred to "serving as a volunteer", the second referred to
"earning academic credit as a volunteer" and the third referred to
"earning a monetary award as a volunteer".
Because it was not apparent to students
that more than one form of the survey existed, it can be assumed that they
responded genuinely to the level of incentive described on their respective
forms. A comparison of group means clarified the degree to which interest in
campus volunteer involvement was influenced by type of incentive offered.
Data were analyzed using a multivariate
analysis of variance (MANOVA) at the .05 level of significance, with incentive
as the
independent variable (3 levels? and the
volunteer opportunities as the dependent variables.
Results
Form
The MANOVA was not significant for form.
This indicates that generally, students did not differentiate between
"serving as a volunteer", "earning academic credit", or
"earning a monetary award" when they rated their level of interest
in, the eight volunteer activities described on the survey.
Volunteer Interest Areas
Based on a rank ordering of group means, we
assessed levels of interest in the eight volunteer opportunities presented on
the survey. While the homecoming committee and the campus recruitment
organization appeared to be the most popular options among first-time
entering students, the counseling center and the health center elicited the
least interest. See Table 1 for a rank ordering of interest levels in the eight
volunteer opportunities, with means and standard deviations.
Insert Table 1 about here
Discussion
When incoming students were asked to rate
their level of interest in volunteering for various campus organizations, they
did not display increased willingness to volunteer with the incentives of course
credit or a monetary award. This finding suggests that incentives do not have a
significant effect on volunteer interest among incoming students.
If first-time entering students are
not more likely to volunteer with incentives, there are a number of possible
explanations. First, the issue of incentives might not be =salient to new
students, who have not yet experienced the shortages of time and money that make
many students feel compelled to spend their time either studying or working at
a part-time job, rather than becoming involved on campus. Related to
this, students may only take incentives into account when they are aware that a
volunteer position is going to require a large commitment of time and energy.
In this study, there was no indication to the students of how demanding the
volunteer positions actually would be.
Another explanation for the finding is that
students may be less concerned with incentives than they are with other aspects
of the volunteer experience, such as how it might help them get a job after
graduation. Finally, there may be a discrepancy between students' stated
interest in volunteering and what they will actually do, the resolution of
which is determined partly by incentives offered. To further investigate this
possibility, we need to study the degree to which volunteer positions that
offer a stipend or course credit attract more students than similar volunteer
opportunities that do not offer any incentives.
The finding that incentives did not
influence volunteer interest should be interpreted cautiously until more
research is conducted on the topic. In this study, no attempt was made to differentiate
students who had some interest in volunteering from those who had none.
Because a large random sample of students was surveyed, the responses of the
many who were not at all inclined to volunteer may have obscured
significant differences among the students who were potentially interested in
campus volunteerism. Thus, a replication of this study should include a
grouping of students on some overall measure of interest in volunteering.
Within the group of the students who do plan to volunteer on campus, there may
be observable differences by type of incentive.
The ranking of interest in specific
volunteer opportunities has both theoretical and practical implications. That
the homecoming committee, the campus recruitment organization, and the co-ed
service fraternity generated the most interest suggests an Enterprising
(Holland, 1985) orientation among first-time entering students. Sergent
and Sedlacek (1990) found significant differences in the vocational interests
of students volunteering for different campus organizations. Specifically, they
found that students in the campus recruitment organization were most often
Enterprising, and that students in the co-ed service fraternity were very
often Enterprising. Although the homecoming committee was not part of the
Sergent and Sedlacek =study, this volunteer opportunity seems similar to the
campus recruitment organization in its "promotional" bent. To the
extent that the first-time entering freshmen in our study do tend to be
Enterprising, this can be viewed as support for Garland's (1985) conclusion
that vocationalism prevails among students of today.
9
There was apparently some sense of
"social interest" (Adler, 1964) among the first-time entering
students we =surveyed. The campus hotline, which Sergent and Sedlacek found to
be comprised of mainly Social (Holland, 1985) type volunteers, ranked fourth as
an interest area. However, two other "helping" organizations, the
counseling center and the health center, were at the bottom of the ranking.
Students were also less interested in tutoring student athletes than they were
in most of the other volunteer opportunities.
While it is interesting to speculate about
the vocational orientations of students based on their volunteer interests, our
findings in this area are also of practical value. As student affairs
professionals concerned with promoting student involvement, we can ask ourselves,
"What is it about the homecoming committee and the campus recruitment
organization that makes them more attractive to students than the counseling
center and the health center?" Aside from the different vocational
interests implied, there are more "superficial" differences that may
warrant our attention. For example, the homecoming committee and the campus
recruitment organization offer volunteers high visibility that may not be
characteristic of other campus volunteer positions. If students are motivated
by high visibility, they may more inclined to volunteer for helping
organizations that incorporate volunteers in their campus outreach efforts
(e.g., health fairs; communication. workshops in the residence halls).
Another notable aspect of the volunteer
opportunities most
10
popular with first-time entering
students is that they directly or indirectly pertain to promoting the
university. The campus recruitment organization provide=_ tours to prospective
students and their parents; the homecoming committee plans an annual event
whose expressed purpose is generating pride and enthusiasm (and money!) for the
university; and the co-ed service fraternity undertakes community service
projects in the name of the university. To the extent that students identify
with the university and want to promote its interests, they will volunteer for
organizations that exhibit "school spirit". For helping organizations
that of necessity put most of their emphasis on direct service, this may imply
a challenge to become more involved in campus events like homecoming. In fact,
such organizations would do well to mobilize the positive energy of student
volunteers in these efforts (e.g., making a health center float for the
homecoming parade).
Finally, the volunteer organizations that
generated the most interest among first-time entering students were those
that offer the opportunity to meet and interact with a large number of people.
In fact, the homecoming committee may have been the most popular volunteer
opportunity precisely because it is associated with one of the biggest social
events on campus. Student affairs professionals charged with recruiting for
other campus organizations might do well to highlight whatever opportunities
exist for volunteers to meet people and socialize.
Research on volunteer interests among first-time
entering students moves us toward a better understanding how to get students
11
involved in general. The results of this
study suggest that incentives do not play an important role in motivating
students to volunteer. However, this issue deserves further attention. What we
did learn was that =students tended to be interested in volunteer positions
that allow them to interact with people in an "enterprising" manner,
as opposed to =serving in a more direct helping capacity. Finally, we
demonstrated how certain features of the more popular volunteer opportunities
could be incorporated by those campus organizations attempting to generate
greater student interest.
References
Adler, A. (1964). Social interest A
challenge to mankind. New: York: Capricorn Books.
Astin, A.W. (1975). Preventing students
from drooping out San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Astin, A.W. (1977). Four critical years.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Astin, A.W. (1984, Winter). A look at
pluralism in the contemporary student population. NASPA Journal, 21, 2-11.
Astin, A.W., & others (1984). The
American freshman: National norms for fall 1983. Los Angeles: University of
California, Cooperative
Institutional
Research Program.
Blackburn, R.D. (1986, March). College
unions on road to stability, prosperity. ACU-I Bulletin, GET
PAGES.
Boatman, S. (1987, May). A model for
communication in volunteer organizations. Programming, pp. 30-35.
Delve, C.I., Mintz, S.D., & Stewart, G.M. (1987). Volunteer service learning
as a dimension of student development: A model for the
delivery
of volunteer services on college campuses. Presented at ACPA/NASPA Celebration,
Chicago, Illinois.
Ellis, S.J. (1985). Research on
volunteerism: What needs to be done. Journal of Voluntary Action Research,
14 (2-3), 11-15.
Garland, P.H. (1985). Serving more than
students: A critical need for college student personnel services. (ASHE-ERIC
Higher Education Report
No. 7).
Washington, D.C.: Association for the Study of Higher Education.
13
Holland, J.L. (1985). The Self-Directed
Search Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources,
Inc.
Mallinckrodt, B., & Sedlacek, W.E.
(1987). Student retention and the use of campus facilities by race. NASPA. Journal,
24 (3), 28-32.
Miller, R. (1987, summer). The elixir of
leadership. Programming, pp. 9-35.
Miller, M.R., & Galey, D. (1988). Administration
and operation of the college union. Bloomington, IN: Association of College
Unions –
International.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 295 515).
Parker, M.A. (1988, March). Student
volunteers: An endangered species? Programming, pp. 49-51.
Pearce, J.L. (1983). Participation in
voluntary associations: How membership in a formal organization changes the
rewards of participation.
In Smith, D.H.
and Van Til, J. (Eds.), International perspectives on voluntary action research
(pp. 148-156). Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, Inc.
Schwalb, S.J., & Sedlacek, W.E. (1990).
Have college student attitudes toward older people changed? Journal of
College Student Development,
31 (2), 127-132.
Sedlacek, W.E., & Brooks, G.C., Jr.
(1972). Situational Attitude Scale Manual. Chicago: Natresources. Inc.
Sergent, M.T., & Sedlacek, W.E. (1990).
Volunteer motivations across student organizations: A test of person-environment
fit theory. Journal
of College
Student Development, 31 (3), 255-261.
Study Group on the Conditions of Excellence
in American Higher Education (1984). Involvement in learning: Realizing the
potential of American
higher education.
Washington, D.C.: National In=stitute of Higher Education.
Tinto, V., (1975). Dropouts from higher
education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational
Research, 45, 89-125.
Univer=sity presidents urged to boost the
quality of student volunteerism as well as the amount (1986, Jan.). Chronicle
of Higher Education,
p. 17.
Upcraft, M.L., Finney. J.E., & Garland,
P.H. (1984). Orientation: A context. In M.L. Upcraft (Ed.), Orienting
=students to college. (New
Directions for
Student Services No. 25). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15
Table 1: A Rank Ordering of Interest Levels in
Eight Campus Volunteer Opportunities, with Means and Sandard Daviations |
|||
Volunteer Opportunity |
Rank |
M |
SD |
Homecoming Committee |
1 |
2.9 |
1.18 |
Campus Recruitment
(Conducting Campus Tours) |
2 |
2.92 |
1.16 |
Co-Ed Service Fraternity |
3 |
2.95 |
1.09 |
Campus Hotline(peer
counseling) |
4 |
3.03 |
1.23 |
Student Union Progamming
Board |
5 |
3.08 |
1.1 |
Athletic Department
(tutoring) |
6 |
3.13 |
1.21 |
Counseling Center
(research; disabled student services) |
7 |
3.18 |
1.11 |
Health Center (peer
education; administrative support). |
8 |
3.28 |
1.17 |
Note. Means are based
on responses to the following scale: 1 = very
interested; 2 = somewhat interested; 3 =
don't know; 4 = somewhat
disinterested; 5 = very disinterested.
Note. N = 850 (52'/,
male, 49% female).