" "‘2' (‘1 "Fr ,, {113; [EL-HI 13'. 2'62. 2 {jg/:2... -. ~51. .2 Lx‘. . ~.\ \ u . ‘\.. _\ 3 3.7;: 3... 3 33 .V .v_'—_"— '4» 1g: ‘ '3. .. _ .3 ‘ 3 "I \Lg‘I-‘t. VS- ' 3;... ' The. 33- I- 3 ‘ r “ L‘ IV‘ -\,; ’ o- wk. .3 1.5:. g3.» '4 :3an rat‘s: ' ‘3... 33% 2W" 5’: 32.1. , ~-\'; ‘51:" 31‘ . \ s . “367$ .r.\"-‘<\,'l'.x' 2.525.351} « M ‘n 1 _.~..‘~.\“\z51§p® Sf; ' I o 3‘3‘7 I. irh- . 5 4352‘“: m" 1'» ' _:_. . 18 {I . 1' ' ”m ' r; {4; ,_ ';',';'Ill".'l‘>" _ " ' 7‘) ' T” . ‘_ l', I" 3"3'1’3’2‘3'591153:(tiny; if" *' W: W W IJ r I a '5 V {323: , r ‘ ‘r'y'llgll'fl’ , fly"! VIE/)1]: :4”. I (3 lip a. 3’ :4] ['13.5/ i3].".'. ... f .':-4 l :IJ'If 2;va _I(/:.C/fi "’7?" 1’ ' we: (:29. 3', ~, {5y / 2, _l .1 . . 'Mfilf/ “(:7 A‘I .13,» “v: _ 5.. ('3‘) my}; 34$! 3:: . - )2} J}; “.1" .‘t5 “:1, 3&3?1:;;§'%" 1““5“ 1!! '{f’ $§f :2 .fi .34.; ""51?" "16:. "Amiaiip has 1-4- --... ' . .--'¥ ”)2. . . 1,33” 223 I ; x .5 . it" /~-, F 3‘ fag)“; £33642 - hr. 1. I ' ‘ v {7 - v”: "-' :3"':’:j5&3{'21;,2: 4, A ‘1’ I ' "x 3! 'r vi. fr.- Im '-fl,f.{v“~}yf .. J flggéfy'fi 7? l ”BRA" Illllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 3 1293 01082 5200 Michigan State University This is to certify that the thesis entitled RECREATION PARTICIPATION, BARRIERS AND PREFERENCES: ADOLESCENT FEMALE SPARE-TIME BEHAVIOR IN BENTON HARBOR, MICHIGAN presented by Oumwtée Manajh hasxbeen accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for M.S. degree in Park and Recreation Resources-Urban Studies DEL/i AUDI profe I Date 4-25-88 0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institulion MSU RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to LIBRARIES remove this checkout from .—_ your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. A935? 4 3 Exit“! 25 if“; .2 53% BEUl 12003 RECREATION PARTICIPATION, BARRIERS AND PREFERENCES: ADOLESCENT FEMALE SPARE-TIME BEHAVIOR IN BENTON HARBOR, MICHIGAN BY Oumatie Marajh A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Parks and Recreation and Urban Affairs Programs 1988 ABSTRACT RECREATION PARTICIPATION, BARRIERS AND PREFERENCES: ADOLESCENT FEMALE SPARE-TIME BEHAVIOR IN BENTON HARBOR, MICHIGAN BY Oumatie Marajh Inner-city recreation personnel are concerned about the low levels of participation by females in organized recreation programs and activities. This study of adolescent females in Benton Harbor, one of Michigan's most economically depressed cities, examines participation in recreation programs in schools and the recreation center, and activities at local parks. Some of the barriers affecting their participation are identified. A measure is made of their interest in potential recreation activities. Levels of participation in recreation activities were not as low as anticipated. Lack of interest and safety were prominent barriers to participation, and preferences were expressed for activities with high social interaction and low competition. With these interests in mind, suggestions for planning innovative types of programs are made to recreation administrators. Copyright by OUMATIE MARAJH 1988 Dedicated to my parents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank all the people of Benton Harbor who made it possible for me to do this study, especially Dr. Henry Easton, Glen Yarbrough, Carl Brown and Alex Little. Special thanks also go to two very hardworking interviewers, Michelle and Yolanda and Mr. James Rutter, Principal, Benton Harbor High School, for his helpful advice. I appreciate the opportunity provided by Dr. John Schweitzer for doing this research as part of the MSU/Benton Harbor Project. I am especially grateful to Dr. Joe T. Darden, Dean of the Urban Affairs Programs, not only for the financial support, but for providing a unique and creative environment in which to complete my graduate program. I was also very happy to have benefitted from the computer skills and expertise of Mike Lipsey and Joshua Bagakas. I received superb guidance from my thesis committee members, Professor Louis Twardzik, Dr. Michael Chubb and especially my major advisor Dr. Daniel Stynes, who displayed such incredible patience. Last, but not least, to all my wonderful friends and fellow students, thank you for being there. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ...................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES .................................................... viii CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ............................................. l The USU/Benton Harbor Project ............................... 1 Recreation in Benton Harbor ................................. 4 The Problem ................................................. 5 General Objectives .......................................... 6 CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ............................ 8 Inner Cities ................................................ 8 Recreation in Cities ........................................ 9 Recreation Patterns of Youth and Racial Groups .............. 12 Barriers in Recreation ...................................... 13 The Benton Harbor Situation ................................. 15 CHAPTER III: METHODS ................................................ 17 Preliminary Stages .......................................... 17 Sampling and Subjects ....................................... 18 Instrumentation ............................................. 19 Data Collection ............................................. 21 Response Rate ............................................... 23 Analysis .................................................... 24 CHAPTER IV: RESULTS ................................................. 26 Description of the Respondents..... ....................... 26 Familiarity with Recreation Facilities ...................... 28 Parks ............. . ....................................... 28 Schools and Recreation Center ............................. 28 Participation Patterns ...................................... 29 Parks ........... . . ..................................... 31 Schools and Recreation Center ............................. 32 Sources of Information ...................................... 34 Perceptions of Participation Barriers ....................... 35 Park Inhibitors ........................................... 35 School and Recreation Center Inhibitors ................... 36 Interests ................................................... 41 Tests of Hypotheses ....................................... 46 CHAPTER V: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .................................. 53 Summary ..................................................... 53 Limitations and Difficulties with the Study ................. 57 Implications and Recommendations of These Results for Benton Harbor ................................. 59 Suggestions for Further Research ............................ 62 APPENDIX ............................................................. 64 REFERENCES ........................................................... 75 vi LIST OF TABLES 1.41212 1. Population of Benton Harbor by Age Group, 1980 .................. 5 2. Summary of Respondent Characteristics by Grade, Race and School................ ........................ 27 3. Recreation Activities at Local Parks ............................ 31 4. Participation in Organised Programs... .......................... 32 5. School and Recreation Center Program Information Sources............ ............................... 34 6. Perceived Park Participation Inhibitors. ........................ 36 7. Responses to School Program Inhibitors .......................... 38 8. Responses to Recreation Center Program Inhibitors ............... 39 9. School Programs Inhibitor Ratings ............................... 40 10. Recreation Center Program Inhibitor Ratings ..................... 42 11. Suggestions of Activities for Spring ............................ 44 12. Interest Levels in Suggested Potential Activities ............... 45 13. Grouped Potential Activities and Ratings ........................ 48 14. Chi-square Test of Relationship between Respondent Participation and Interest in Potential Activities ............ 50 15. Relationship Between Age and Participation in Organized Recreation Programs ................................. 51 16. Relationship Between Age and Potential Interest in Recreation Programs ........................................ 52 vii LIST OF FIGURES Elms 1. Map Showing Location of Benton Harbor, in relation to Other Urban Areas ............................. 2 2. Conceptual Framework of Factors Affecting Evaluation of Recreation Resources .......................... 11 3. Venn Diagram of Participation in Parks, Schools and Recreation Center Programs ........................ 3O 4. Comparison of Barriers Cited for School and Recreation Center Programs ................................ 42 5. Spring Leisure Time Patterns by Days of the Week ................ 47 viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This study is an investigation of the recreation behavior and preferences of adolescent females in Benton Harbor, an economically depressed city located in the southwest part of Michigan. Benton Harbor is somewhat of an anomaly. It is small (population 14,000) and situated a considerable distance away from the major urbanized areas around Chicago and Detroit (Figure 1) yet it experiences problems typical of inner-city environments. The study began in 1986 as a part of the Michigan State University's Benton Harbor Project. It was undertaken in response to concern by Benton Harbor recreation personnel that levels of female participation in organized public recreation programs was very low. Th SU nto b In 1985, the Urban Affairs Programs at Michigan State University started the MSU Benton Harbor Project to aid in the social and economic development and revitalization of the city of Benton Harbor. This project is an innovative effort by a university to utilize its human resources to help solve problems in an urban environment. Most of the initial funding was provided by the Whirlpool Foundation, one of the few major manufacturing firms remaining in the city. MILWAUKEE m I G A N wnsc "" WW I W All! CHiCAGO’ Tm Foam Alum l N D I A A Lil. I L Mum u-nm O H O m Colum- W ' 'n‘ 0 8 9* F—-r4-r-J O a sow CINCINNATI Figure 1. Map Showing Location of Benton Harbor, in relation to Other Urban Areas. (Tiefenbach, 1986) Some of the overall project objectives are to: 1. Collect and review data about current conditions. 2. Identify university resources appropriate to the problems. 3. Encourage and promote MSU student/faculty projects that focus on a particular problem in Benton Harbor. 4. Determine the resources available from state, federal, corporate and foundation funding sources. 5. Host an area conference. (Benton Harbor Development Project, 1985). Discussions between the project team and some of the key personnel in the city revealed many problems. Economic development of the downtown business areas, improved community services and facilities, and more education and training programs for residents were some of the initial problems that were identified. The recreation personnel in Benton Harbor were concerned about the low levels of female participation in the programs offered within the city, and expressed a desire for an investigation of this problem. Non-participation in organized recreation programs is generally viewed as a multi-faceted problem which must be solved by recreation planners and managers. Adolescent participation in recreation activities, especially within urban environments, has usually been dominated by males. This may have been because of the emphasis on athletics, the traditionally passive role played by females, or the fact that females were subject to more 'difficulties' if they wished to participate. It is only as recently as the 1970's that innovative recreation programs for women assumed some importance (Shoebridge, 1987) and allowed them to be free of the competition and social role problems that arise when males are present (Yerkes, 1985). Re a Because of the near bankrupt condition of the city, its current recreation programs (as outlined in the five year recreation development plan for Benton Harbor 1985-1989) provide comparatively few organized recreation opportunities for the population. Only six of the city's eleven parks are being maintained. The other five parks are in various states of neglect and in need of restoration. Most of the activity programs are at the single recreation center, the Charles Gray Recreation Center. Schools schedule some of their recreation programs at the city recreation center, especially Benton Harbor High School which is located adjacent to the recreation center. Other school club and athletic activities are conducted on the school premises. Since 64% of the city's population is under 30 years of age there is a need for appropiate recreation youth programs (Table 1). Census data from 1980 show that at least 20% of the total population are below 18 years at the time of this study. Future plans for the City of Benton Harbor include development of water recreational opportunities (boating, fishing, water skiing), a city operated roller skating rink, expansion of the recreation programs and activities held in the parks and at the Table 1 Population of Benton Harbor by Age Group, 1980. Age Number % of Total Population* Under 5 years 1,785 12 5 - 9 1,880 13 10 - 14 1,831 13 15 - 34 4,769 33 35 - 44 1,197 8 45 years & over 3,245 22 TOTAL 14,707 100 *May not sum to 100 due to rounding Source: [U.S. Census (Michigan) -1982.] recreation center, and other possibly revenue-generating activities. Benton Harbor also has a potential for tourism development, for it is strategically located on the shores of Lake Michigan and about ninety miles from the city of Chicago. Mum When this study began, city park and recreation personnel stated that the existing recreational facilities were being utilized mostly by male youths, with very few female participants (Brown and Yarbrough, 1986). No reliable statistics on male\fema1e participation patterns were being kept at that time. Programs for young females include tennis, basketball, volleyball, swimming, dancing, and arts and crafts. Park programs were largely limited to the summer. There were no quasi-public, indoor or club types of programs such as the 4-H or YWCA operating in the city. The schools offered a limited range of sports and athletic programs, and some indoor club activities. The alleged low participation by females could have been because few of these traditional types of programs appeal to them. The Benton Harbor community also had a substantial proportion of single parent families (over 60%), consisting of teenage mothers and their children living on public assistance (Brown, 1986). It is quite possible that these teenagers may have different patterns of recreation behavior because of family responsibilities. The lack of documented information on the recreation patterns and preferences of adolescent females prevents city recreation personnel from basing their planning or programming on known needs. If the adolescents females in Benton Harbor are inhibited in their participation in recreation programs provided by the city, then a more adequate knowledge of the attitudes, preferences, and patterns of their recreation behavior would assist recreation administrators and programmers in designing more attractive opportunities. Ge r v The general objectives of this study were: 1. To estimate the levels of participation of adolescent females in organized recreation programs. This was done by obtaining information about participation in programs that were currently being offered through the schools, the neighborhood parks and the city recreation center. To estimate the degree of awareness of these recreation programs and facilities among the female adolescent population in Benton Harbor. To identify the barriers, if any, that females encounter in participating in recreation programs and to determine their importance as perceived by the study population. Perceptions of the barriers at the schools, parks and recreation center were examined. To identify the recreation interests of female adolescents by examining their spare-time activities and their interests in recreation activities. To test relationships between grade in school and recreation participation behavior. Grade levels of the students in the sample reflects differences in age. To make recommendations to the city and school recreation personnel for the design of relevant recreation programs and activities for adolescent females. CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Examination of the urban recreation literature revealed several key factors that impact recreation behavior. The review is separated into sections that look at inner cities, recreation in the inner cities, the recreation patterns of youth and racial groups, barriers to participation in recreation and some background information on the city of Benton Harbor. W The inner-city populations of the Unit d States have been characterized as the “underclass," ”the ecojbmically disadvantaged," the “ghetto neighborhoods" and the ”truly disadvantaged” (Wilson, 1987). Most of the inhabitants of inner-cities are severely affected by poverty, crime, high rates of unemployment, and associated social disorders. Almost 60% of the nation's 26.5 million black citizens live in central cities (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1984) and have to contend with such conditions. This underclass in the central cities now seems to be a permanent phenemenon, representing a chronic problem for American society. It has been predicted that as inner city residents find job opportunities, and migrate to other areas, they leave behind a continuous poverty stricken population, more or less on permanent welfare with little hopes of long term employment (Wilson, 1987). The leisure patterns and recreation activities of inner-city populations are therefore shaped by this environment. W A study in Lansing Model Cities Program was one of the first attempts to identify the recreation needs and desires of an inner- city population and use the results to design recreation programs. An indepth interview survey of 159 households was undertaken in 1971 as part of this program (Recreation Resource Consultants, 1972). A high proportion of the respondents was separated or divorced black persons (29%). An income level of less than $8,000 a year was found in 73% of the respondents; a similar situation exists in Benton Harbor. The study also found that less than 25% of the students contacted (both male and female) participated in school sports or belonged to school or college clubs. Since 32% of these students indicated they had part-time jobs, after school work may have been a major barrier to recreation participation. Marans and Fly (1981) conducted a study of the recreation behavior and recreation resources of residents of the Detroit metropolitan area in 1974-1975. Social survey data from personal interviews of 1,194 adults living in households in the metropolitan area were used in this study. They found that the lowest levels of participation in recreation existed in older people, non-whites, those with limited incomes and education, and inner-city residents. Young white adults with high family incomes and those living in the suburbs were more likely to engage in outdoor recreation. 10 A conceptual model was developed by the authors to represent the interrelationship between urban recreation behavior and specific attributes of the urban environment that facilitate or impede people's responses to the recreational resources available to them. This model links the recreational experiences to individual perceptions, the types of available resources, and the environment. All of these features are thought to impact leisure satisfaction and the overall quality of the recreation experience (Figure 2). Socioeconomic and demographic characteristics were found to be a major influence on recreation behavior in this study. The environmental component is described as the resources available, and the real and perceived attributes of the residential location such as safety, levels of crime or traffic, are termed ~neighborhood quality” (Figure 2). Evaluation of recreation facilities results from actual use of facilities, or personal and peer group opinions. This model is particularly relevant as it demonstrates the multi- faceted process that occurs in individuals as they perceive or evaluate the available recreation resources. Some of their conclusions were as follows: - Inner city residents participated in fewer outdoor recreation activities and less frequently than suburban residents. - Contrary to popular belief, proximity to recreational facilities has no bearing on how often peOple participate at those facilities. 11 RECREATION RESOURCES PERSON EVALUATION OF CHARACTERISTICS RECREATION RESOURCES A H... J. RECREATION NEIGHBORHOOD BEHAVIOR __‘ QUALITY other leisure pursuits LEISURE SATISFACTION other life domains _I%} OVERALL QOL EXPERIENC Figure 2. Conceptual Framework of Factors Affecting Evaluation of Recreation Resources. (Marans and Fly, 1981) 12 Upkeep, safety and noise are most important neighborhood conditions in understanding the extent to which people recreate near home, for in those areas with environmental and social problems, people did not participate as often as those without. Lowest levels of satisfaction with neighborhood facilities generally and with facilities for children were reported among blacks living in Detroit. Rec ea 1 n atte o a a ou Race and ethnicity are significant factors in influencing participation in outdoor recreation activities (McDonald and Hutchinson, 1986). Researchers have used four theoretical approaches in examining racial and ethnic variations. 1. The socioeconomic demographic theory attributes similarities and differences in participation to social class. The marginality theory is based on the notion that nonparticipation in outdoor recreation results from preventitive factors such as racial discrimination and poverty (Yancy and Snell, 1971; Wagner and Donahue 1976). The opportunity theory attributes this variation in participation to disparities in the availability of outdoor recreation resources (Hauser, 1962). The ethnicity perspective ascribes these differences to subcultural norms and values (wasburne, 1979). All of 13 these may apply in varying degrees to a particular population at any one time. Deyak (1975) found participation rates of 9-15 year old youths in recreation programs in an urban setting significantly related to age, income, race and sex. Both black males and females showed significantly lower levels of participation rates compared to their white counterparts. Clark (1974) reported that the most popular and socially accepted vehicles of youth interaction in low income black families, in south and west Chicago were teen "dance parties." It appears likely that black youths in low income neighborhoods may not be interested in traditional types of recreational programs, but may have evolved some of their own. Ba r c t o A number of studies have examined barriers to participation (Mueller, Gurin and Wood 1962; University of Wisconsin College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 1974; Hatry g;_§1., 1977; Nationwide Outdoor Recreation Survey, 1977; Godbey, 1985). Spotts and Stynes (1984) examined familiarity of residents of Lansing, Michigan with local parks, and found lack of awareness to be fairly widespread. Howard and Crompton (1980) found the most frequent reason cited for lack of participation by low income adults was a lack of awareness of the services available to them. Many fall prey to the 'malignancy of idleness' (McDonald and Hutchinson, 1986), or are inhibited by fiscal restrictions of poverty and a lack of a 14 constructive concept of leisure (Kraus, 1972). Recreation agencies have often not involved the poor in decision making (Godbey, 1985). Godbey (1985), in a study on the non-use of urban leisure services, ranked 21 different reasons for nonparticipation by respondents who wished to participate but were prevented from doing so. Reasons that were highly ranked included lack of interest, lack of time, inconvenient location, personal health, and fear of crime. Those at the lowest end of the ranking included uninteresting activities and staff and program leaders not being liked. Lack of money and transportation were also cited. The Nationwide Recreation Survey (1982-1983) provides a summary of the respondents who said they did nothing at all for recreation in the past 12 months (11% of the sample). This inactive subgroup belonged to older age groups, did not finish high school, were in lower income groups, and lived in one or two person households. Almost twice the proportion of blacks said they were nonparticipants as compared to whites. Searle and Jackson (1985) described five main barriers to participation. These include a lack of interest, time, money, facilities, and required skills, but the authors pointed out that no study ever examined these factors simultaneously. Based on an earlier analysis of residents in Alberta, Jackson and Searle (1983) found a low desire to participate in a new recreational activity existed in single parents. Perceptions of barriers to participation will vary among individuals. Searle and Jackson (1985) focused on socioeconomic variations within a population and found females evaluated barriers 15 as more significant obstacles than males. Work commitments were stronger barriers to participation by females. A comprehensive classification of nonparticipation has been written by Jackson and Dunn (1987) who identify 5 categories of this behavior from existing literature as follows: '1. People who would like to participate but are unable to do so because of the influence of one or more barriers including a lack of interest. 2. Former participants who have ceased participating. 3. Groups who wish to but are unable to increase the frequency or intensity of their participation. 4. People who do not use a particular resource or facility. 5. People who participate but are unable to achieve the full desired level of satisfaction or enjoyment." The above studies indicate that there are several barriers to recreation participation that may be unique to the urban, black, low-income neighborhood. Some of the factors in the Benton Harbor situation will be used to provide insight into these barriers as they are perceived by females. e 0 us 0 Although it is small, the City of Benton Harbor has most of the characteristics of a major city's disadvantaged inner core. Located in southwestern Michigan, Benton Harbor has a population of approximately 14,700 of which 86% are black. A large proportion are uneducated, unskilled, unemployed and very poor (Aworura, 1985). 16 The 1980 census reports that the per capita incomes of the residents in Benton Harbor was $3,766.00, with nearly 40 percent of the families living below the established poverty level and over 60 percent of the families on some type of public assistance (Benton Harbor Project Report, 1987). In 1960 Benton Harbor was a thriving community with over 500 operating businesses and a population that was expected to increase at least 20% by the 1980's. In the early 1970's it experienced a severe economic recession, due mainly to the decline in the city's automobile-related and other manufacturing industries. During this period many white residents moved out of the city. The majority of the black population was unable to move out, and they were later joined by other blacks taking advantage of depressed rental and real estate prices. This set of circumstances in the city of Benton Harbor provided an opportunity to study a predominantly black, adolescent female population, residing in an inner-city environment and relatively disadvantaged in the availability of resources. This study will focus on the recreation behavior patterns and preferences of teenage females attending school. CHAPTER 3 METHODS A survey of the female adolescents of Benton Harbor was conducted in order to achieve the objectives stated in Chapter 1. Personal interviews, done at the schools, were used to obtain all the information. This chapter describes: l. The study population and sampling methods. 2. The design and format of the survey instrument. 3. Data collection procedures. 4. Data processing and analysis. We: The study population consisted of adolescent females residing in Benton Harbor and attending Benton Harbor public schools. Adolescent females were defined as all females in the 11 to 19 year age group attending grades 7 through 12. The study began in January 1987 when the superintendent of the Benton Harbor Area Schools was contacted for permission to interview a sample of the study population and to elicit the cooperation of the principals of the schools involved. It was also necessary to obtain approval from the Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects at Michigan State University. The interview survey of adolescent females was the primary source of data. A detailed interview schedule was developed by means of staff discussions, evaluations of similar recreation survey 17 l8 instruments and interviews with recreation personnel. This was submitted to school and recreation personnel in Benton Harbor for their suggestions and approval. Additional information came from informal interviews with local school and recreation officials and a short mailed questionnaire to the parents of those students selected to be respondents. The parents' questionnaire was very brief, asking only for suggestions about recreation programs. It was intended primarily to stimulate parental approval and to generate community interest in the survey. a l n d b c An alphabetical list of names of all students registered for school in grades 7 through 12 was obtained from the Benton Harbor Area Schools offices. The list contained 1,465 female students. Estimates based on the 1980 census from the Southwestern Michigan Planning Commission indicated about 1,600 females in the 11 to 19 year category were residing at that time in the city. Therefore, it is likely that about 135 adolescent females are not included in the school list. The estimated drop-out rate for male and female Benton Harbor public school students was 12.7% in 1987 (Benton Harbor Project Library). This rate, applied to the adolescent population of 1,600, yields approximately 213 females between 11 and 19 years old in the city who did not attend school. Assuming that the rate would be somewhat lower for females than males, it is likely that between 130 and 200 of Benton Harbor's adolescent female population (8 to 13%) were not included in the study. However, there may have 19 been population changes since 1980 that affect the precision of these estimates. From the list of 1,465 individuals registered for school, 208 names were selected by using a systematic sampling method. The starting point was a random number and then every 7th individual was selected until 208 names were collected. These 208 individuals were divided into groups by school and grade and letters were sent to the home addresses of parents and guardians, requesting signed permission for the students to be interviewed at their respective schools. The final list contained 117 students from the Benton Harbor High School, 52 from the McCord and King 7th and 8th Grade Center, and 33 from Fairplane Junior High School. The original intention was to include both those attending school and the school drop-outs, but time and financial constraints precluded the more difficult task of interviewing the school drop-outs. W The interview questionnaire used for collecting data from the students contained 14 questions, using both fixed response and open- ended questions. All questions were worded in simple language so as to be easily understood and interpreted by both the interviewers and respondents. The decision to use personal interviews was based on the perception that this was the most reliable and accurate method of obtaining responses from this population. 20 The questionnaire (Appendix A) covered four major areas: 1. Leisure time patterns: The first four questions were open-ended and sought to develop a profile of the typical student's participation in spare-time activities and patterns of spare-time behavior. A time-budget framework was used to identify up to four activities in which the respondent had participated. The times, locations and the types of social interaction for each activity were recorded for weekdays, Saturdays and Sundays. Similar questions were asked for each of three seasons, beginning with spring when the interviews were conducted, followed by winter and summer. It was assumed that spring and fall activities would be similar enough in character not to require a separate group of questions for fall. Awareness and Participation: The city and the school system offer organized recreation programs at the parks, schools and the recreation center. All respondents were asked to identify the two neighborhood parks nearest their homes and then to describe their participation in activities there. This was followed by questions measuring awareness of school and city-sponsored recreation programs and the level of their participation in each. Barriers to Participation: Perceptions of barriers to participation in activities at parks, schools and the city recreation center were investigated separately. The 21 initial questions were open-ended to detect as many perceived barriers as possible. Later, in a formal closed list of barriers for the schools and the recreation center, the students were asked to rate on a 5 point Likert scale the importance of each barrier. Recognizing that there might be some unwillingness to volunteer certain barriers these questions asked subjects to rate the barriers in terms of how they affected members of their peer group. It was hypothesized that respondents would find it easier to evaluate barriers if these barriers were associated with their peer group. 4. Recreation Preferences: To determine levels of interest in recreation activities students were asked to name activities throughout the year in which they would prefer to participate. These questions were open-ended and required the respondent to also choose locations, times and social group involvement. The question immediately following this contained a closed list of activities. Subjects were asked were to rate their potential interest in each activity on a scale of l to 5, with 1 representing no interest and 5 as very interested. Dat o e o The personal interviews were conducted at the four schools. Each student was interviewed at school. All interviews were administered by myself and two teenagers who were residents of 22 Benton Harbor. There were many advantages to using teenage residents of the city as interviewers, including their familiarity with inner city language and behavior patterns. They proved to be invaluable in identifying the locations and the phone numbers of parents and guardians of students in the sample who did not respond to the first letters. They were also familiar with many of the administrative procedures at the school level, for they were both graduates of the Benton Harbor High School. My own involvement in the interviewing process also helped in clarifying questions and interpreting responses. The community in Benton Harbor, from informal interviews with residents, showed signs of being weary of studies and surveys by outside research teams so the use of local residents as interviewers proved to be a good community relations strategy. The community's perceptions of the research personnel had a very positive overall effect on the survey and contributed to the high response rate obtained during the survey. The study was done with the cooperation of the Benton Harbor Area Schools and the city's Department of Public and Recreation Services. The questionnaire was pretested with an additional random sample of 15 individuals drawn from those not previously selected. The two interviewers were intensively trained to use the best techniques to elicit cooperation, understanding and reliable responses. Interviewing females from the additional sample clarified difficulties in interpreting questions and responses during this period. The voluntary and confidential nature of these 23 interviews was stressed in all the materials and wording used. The 15 practice interviews were not used in the analysis. Prior parental consent was obtained by mailing a letter requesting signed permission to parents or guardians of the selected students. Arrangements for interrupting students from their regular class schedule were made through each school principal, and a special room was prepared for conducting interviews. Each selected student was taken out of their classroom, (usually with the assistance of the school counsellor, principal, or one of the interviewers) and was interviewed with their consent after a short explanation of the nature of the survey. Each interview lasted for approximately 20 minutes and was conducted by one of the three interviewers, between 9.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. on regular school days, in late April and early May, 1987. W A total of 200 letters were sent to parents and guardians, and 21 replies were returned. Ten letters were returned because of no available forwarding addresses. Follow-up telephone calls were made to the remaining parents requesting their permission until a total of 124 positive contacts were obtained. There were three direct refusals and 121 interviews were completed and used in the data analysis. No replacements were possible because delays in obtaining administrative and parental approval had taken more time than anticipated and the interviews had to be completed before the end of the school year. Follow-up calls and attempts to contact parents took a much longer time than expected because there was difficulty 24 in locating what proved to be an inaccessible population. Attempts to locate the parents by telephone during the daytime proved to be almost futile, and many calls requesting permission had to be done at night by the two local interviewers. Mia The questionnaires were collected at the end of each day and checked for any errors or responses that were not clearly stated. At the end of the survey, the questionnaires were coded and entered directly onto a floppy disR by this author using a BASIC program, which placed all the data into an ASCI file. The data were read into the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) and a system file was set up for statistical analysis. Very little cleaning or editing of the data was necessary and no cases were discarded. Open-ended questions were categorised and coded. In all questions with multiple responses, where there was more than one answer or choice of answer, each answer was treated separately and the results reported as separate responses before they were combined into any other form. The percentages of the respondents who had knowledge of the recreation programs available at the parks, schools and the city's recreation center and the level of participation at each of these sites were measured. The manner by which this knowledge of recreation opportunity was transmitted in the schools and the recreation center was investigated. The perceptions of barriers at each site where recreation activities occurred were presented in 25 tables, showing all the categories of responses. A comparison of the barriers at schools and at the recreation center was also presented. Measurements of the potential interest in recreation activities formed another section of this analysis. From the list of suggested recreation activities a rank order was made, which also included the frequency of responses. This list of activities was later combined into four categories, (1) team sports, (2) social and club events, (3) cultural activities and (4) activities that had an impact on personal appearance such as, fashions, hairstyle and make-up. It was then possible to test for relationships between the group's interest in certain types of activities and other variables. Hypotheses were tested using Chi-Square statistics. Hypothesis 1. Students who participated in recreation programs would show more interest in recreation activities. This is based on the notion that if the respondent was already familiar with the existing recreation opportunities, and showed interest by participating, she would be more likely to be interested in other types of recreation activities. Hypothesis 2. Age affects participation in recreation programs. As a sub-hypothesis of this, age would also affect preferences for recreation programs. Age will be assumed to be reflected by the grade level of each respondent. Recreation activities may appeal to different age groups in a variety of ways, therefore the participation in recreation programs will be affected. CHAPTER 4 RESULTS The data, collected from interviewing 121 subjects, were coded analysed, and then used to produce the following results. The analysis was divided into 5 major sections based on the 5 study objectives. These were: 1. To measure the levels of participation of adolescent females in recreation activities at neighborhood parks, schools, and in programs provided at the recreation center. To measure the levels of awareness and knowledge of available recreation oppportunities at neighborhood parks, schools and the city recreation center. To identify barriers to participation and the perceived importance of these barriers. To identify recreation activity interests of this study group. To compare these interests and participation with age. th e t Table 2 summarizes the characteristics of the sample by race grade, and school. School registration data indicate that 80% of students in Benton Harbor are black and 19% white. However, no information was available on the percentages of blacks and whites by grades or sex. The respondent group consisted of 84% black and 26 27 16% white students, so its racial composition closely resembled that of the student population in Benton Harbor. Table 2 Summary of Respondent Characteristics by Grade, Race and School N - 121 Categories Number Percent* Whites 19 16 Blacks 102 84 Grade 7 27 22 Grade 8 l6 13 Grade 9 20 17 Grade 10 21 17 Grade 11 21 17 Grade 12 16 13 Benton Harbor High School 78 65 Ring 8th Grade 8 7 McCord 7th Grade l6 l3 Fairplain Junior High School 19 16 * Percentage may not sum to 100 because of rounding. 28 FAMILIARITY WITH RECREATION FACILITIES Respondents were asked about their knowledge of park locations and recreation facilities at the parks. This was followed by questions about their knowledge of programs at the schools and the recreation center. £91155. Ninety-seven percent of the respondents could correctly identify one park close to their home, and 85% were able to name a second one. The accuracy of these responses was verified by the two local interviewers who were very familiar with the location of the city parks and the addresses of the respondents. Subjects were later asked to identify two other parks, not necessarily in their own neighborhood. Seventy-four percent knew a third park and 69% could name four. Lack of knowledge of the location of parks does not appear to be a problem, but there are differences between the proportions knowing about the neighborhood parks and visiting them. Only 81% had ever visited the first park that they had identified and 57% had been to the second park. 0 e a Ce Seventy-two percent of the respondents were aware of school recreation programs and 54% knew of the programs at the city recreation center. A higher percentage of the students were unaware of school and recreation center programs than were unaware of the 29 location of their neighborhood parks. Levels of participation at parks, schools and the recreation center were then examined. PARTICIPATION PATTERNS A Venn diagram was developed to illustrate the proportion of the respondents participating at each type of recreation facility and the degree of overlap between participation (Figure 3). Seventeen percent of the respondents did not participate in recreation activities at any of the three locations. Participation at parks was highest, with 55% reporting activities, 53% participated at schools and 32% at the recreation center. Fourteen percent of the respondents participated at all three facilities. The greatest overlap occurred between parks and schools. These results are surprising, since the perception by recreation personnel was of very low participation by adolescent females. These levels of participation do not support this view. The lack of information on the frequency of participation prevents a more thorough description of the extent of the participation patterns at these facilities. None of the subjects were asked specific questions about the the number of times in the past 6 months or 12 months that they had participated in some organized recreation activity. 30 4.! RECREATION CENTER PARKS CHOOL S 171 Figure 3. Venn Diagram of Participation in Parks, Schools and Recreation Center Programs. 31 Parks A summary of recreation activities was prepared (Table 3) from the open-ended questions which asked the respondents to report activities at the local parks. Table 3 Recreation Activities at Local Parks Activities Park 1 Park 2 Number % Number % Sports 28 36 19 35 Hanging Out 26 33 19 34 Don’t Know ll 14 8 15 Spectator 8 10 6 11 Other 5 6 3 6 Total 78 100 55 100 * Percentage may not sum to 100 due to rounding. Sports activities including basketball, volleyball, and track and field were the most frequently reported activities at the parks. The next most frequently cited activity was "hanging out". This term was often used by respondents throughout the interviews to mean any type of unstructured social interaction between two or more people at locations such as mall, park or swimming pool or at home, and not to be involved in any particular activity. 32 "Don't know" responses indicate an inability of the subjects to identify any specific activity although they had visited the park. This could also be interpreted as another form of "hanging out". W Fifty-three percent of the subjects participated in at least one organized school recreation activity. Thirty percent participated in at least one organized program at the recreation center. A summary of the patterns of participation is provided as each individual was allowed to list up to three activities in which she had participated (Table 4). Table 4 Participation in Organized Programs 5.211221 W No. of No. of Program Participants Program Participants Team Sports 28 Swimming 23 Cheerleading 27 Social Events 13 Track & Field 18 Cheerleading 5 Other 8 Team Sports 4 Social Events 4 Swimming 1 Total 86 45 33 None of the respondents listed three activities, but 18% reported a second activity for the schools and 7% reported a second activity for the recreation center. The 'team sports' activities included volleyball, basketball or softball and the 'social events' included activities such as dances, parties and other social functions. There are differences between the percentage of individuals who knew of these programs, and the numbers who participated in one or more of them. Seventy-two percent of the respondents had knowledge of the school programs, and 54% knew of the recreation center programs. Since lack of knowledge does not appear to be a major problem, there must be other factors that affect participation. When participants in both the schools and recreation center programs were asked if they were interested in more frequent participation at these locations, 69% said 'yes' for school programs and 28% indicated a desire for more participation at the recreation center. This question did not, however, include those students who were not participants in any organized program or activity. It should have been asked of all the respondents who were interviewed in order to reveal any desire to participate and identify any barriers or inhibitors for this group. This was an oversight in the sequence of coding of questions in the questionnaire, which automatically excluded those subjects that did not participate in recreation programs. The assumption was that the non-participants would not have a desire for more participation. 34 SOURCES OF INFORMATION All respondents were asked about how they received information about recreation programs at the school and the recreation center (Table 5). Previous interviews with school and recreation personnel indicated the schools relied on making appropriate announcements, while the recreation center used advertisements and notices about its programs which are distributed at the parks and the recreation center. Therefore, the non-participant in recreation programs and the students who had not visited the parks or the recreation center were unlikely to receive this information. Table 5 School and Recreation Center Program Information Sources N - 121 Source School Recreation Center %* gs Announcements 82 24 Friends . 11 26 Advertisement\Notices 4 21 Other 3 15 * Percent may not sum to 100 due to rounding. Verbal announcements made at the schools were the most frequently cited source of information about school programs, but not for the recreation center. Friends, possibly through peer group 35 interaction, were the most effective medium for passing on information about the recreation center programs. Twenty-one percent of the sample cited advertisements or notices as their means of obtaining information about the recreation center. PERCEPTIONS OF PARTICIPATION BARRIERS W Respondents were asked in an open-ended question about the reasons why they liked or disliked their local parks. They were also asked to name any inhibitors or barriers that affected their use of park facilities. The major attraction of the parks was as a place to get out of the house and meet friends. Social interaction is an important reason for visiting the parks. The majority of students did not identify any barriers to their use of the park facilities. Safety and security were a major concern of some individuals who described fighting, drunken behavior and instances of violence occurring in the parks (Table 6). Others perceived some users of the parks as undesirable and sometimes threatening. A few cited lack of programs as a barrier. Transportation was cited as a barrier in reference to the second park they were asked to identify. When asked about the barriers of the third and fourth parks that they had previously identified, 58% did not associate any barriers with these parks, but 17% raised safety concerns. 36 Table 6 Perceived Park Participation Inhibitors Inhibitors Park 1 Park 2 * Number % Number % None 44 46 52 58 No Safety/Security 33 34 17 19 Don't Know 9 9 4 4 Lack of Programs 4 4 3 3 Lack of Time 3 3 - - Other 3 3 - - Transportation - - 6 6 * Percentage may not sum to 100 due to rounding. WWW Subjects were asked in an open-ended question to identify anything that prevented their participation in school and recreation center programs and how they perceived such inhibitors affected girls in their peer group. This was thought to be the best way of obtaining a reliable response because each person would think it affected someone else. Any personal embarassment associated with these barriers would be minimized. This was followed by a question in which a list of known inhibitors was shown to the respondent, and she was asked if any of them affected her. The list contained 6 barriers, lack of time, lack of money, transportation, lack of interest, safety/security and 37 lack of equipment. Up to four barriers from the list could be chosen by each individual for both the schools and the recreation center, with each one rated on a scale of one to five and five representing the most important. Using an open ended question to identify barriers before presenting a fixed list allowed individuals to give free responses not influenced by the interview process. The prepared list used for the schools and the recreation center helped elicit responses from those who may not have been able to think of specific inhibitors. The fixed list was always asked after the open-ended questions to prevent initial responses from being influenced by the list. Tables 7 and 8 present percentages of respondents citing barriers from the fixed list for the school and recreation center program. Since subjects could cite up to 4 barriers, percentages are reported for each of the 7 categories. Column 2 in each table represents the number of students who made some response to a barrier on the fixed list. The fourth column represents the percentages only of those in the sample who cited a barrier when presented with the fixed list. Transportation problems and lack of interest were the two most frequently cited barriers to participation in the school programs (Table 7) and lack of interest and time were foremost for the recreation center programs (Table 8). Lack of interest is the most frequently cited inhibitor for both the school and the recreation center programs. 38 Table 7 Responses to School Program Inhibitors N - 121 N - 95 Inhibitors N % of All % of Those Citing Respondents Barriers Lack of Interest 36 3O 38 Safety/Security 31 26 33 Transportation 34 28 36 Lack of Time 32 26 34 Lack of Money 24 20 25 Lack of Equipment 6 5 6 Don't Know 26 22 This lack of interest may be associated with other barriers such as the lack of money or safety, but no analysis was made of the possible linkages between the barriers. It is reasonable to assume that if an adolescent female is inhibited by lack of money and/or concern for safety, she is unlikely to express a high level of interest in programs. Another reason that lack of interest is so high is that the type of programs offered may have relatively little appeal to this group. This could be a potential topic for future study now that participation is known to be higher than key informants suggested. Ratings of importance of barriers were similar for the school and the recreation center. Most of the inhibitors that were cited were rated as very important. This could be interpreted as meaning 39 Table 8 Responses to Recreation Center Program Inhibitors N - 121 N - 87 Inhibitors N % of All % of Those Citing Respondents Barriers Lack of Interest 56 46 64 Safety/Security 17 14 20 Transportation 32 26 37 Lack of Time 41 34 47 Lack of Money 25 21 29 Lack of Equipment 12 10 14 Don't Know 34 28 either that students only acknowledged the important inhibitors as barriers, ignoring those that were of lesser importance, or that all barriers were perceived as being very important. Lack of money was the most highly rated barrier for the school programs, followed by time and safety (Table 9). Transportation was the highest rated for the recreation center, followed by time and money (see Table 10). The results for the school could be interpreted as meaning that financial problems are a more serious problem for school programs. The recreation center may be thought of as a place to go after school or on weekends and the lack of transportation will restrict participation. The proportion of the responses in the very important category (column value - 5) at the recreation center was higher than for the school, suggesting that 40 Table 9 School Programs Inhibitor Ratings Was: Inhibitor Increasing Importance Tota1(N)* Ratings 1 2 3 4 5 Lack of Interest 9 5 3 3 16 36 3.3 Safety/Security 4 0 l 4 22 31 4.3 Transportation 3 2 2 4 23 34 4.2 Lack of Time 2 1 4 l 24 32 4.4 Lack of Money 0 3 O 0 21 24 4.6 Lack of Equipment 1 1 O 0 4 6 3.8 Total 19 12 10 12 110 163 * Twenty-six subjects did not identify any barriers. the same types of barriers are more of a problem at the recreation center. This may also be caused by the sequence of questions, and the respondents being fatigued at this time. The percentage of respondents who cited barriers to the school and recreation center programs are compared in Figure 4. Lack of interest appeared more frequently at the recreation center than the school. The safety\security barrier was cited more often for the school, possibly due to the fact that more people were aware of school programs but perceived safety as a barrier to participation. In the open-ended question to barriers to schools and the recreation center programs, the main reasons given were lack of interest and lack of time. A common reason cited for the non- 41 Table 10 Recreation Center Program Inhibitor Ratings Inhibitor Increasing Importance Total (N)* Ratings 1 2 3 4 5 Lack of Interest 4 1 5 4 42 56 4.4 Safety/Security 0 1 4 1 ll 17 4.3 Transportation 1 0 1 2 28 32 4.8 Lack of Time 1 1 3 4 32 41 4.6 Lack of Money 0 l 2 l 21 25 4.7 Lack of Equipment 1 2 1 0 9 12 4.2 Total 7 6 16 12 143 183 * Thirty-four subjects did not identify any barriers. participation of other girls in organized recreation programs was that they preferred to be with their boyfriends. If this is true, it would also explain the lack of interest in using recreation facilities. They may prefer to "hang out" with their boyfriends than to participate in organized recreation programs. This response may also indicate a potential for co-ed activities. INTERESTS The last part of this analysis describes the kinds of recreation activities in which respondents said they would like to participate at various times and locations. Each respondent was asked to name at least two 'spare-time activity' Opportunities they 42 Egg earn! a recreation center 'flmm - 8 L O .- .5 Safety Transport Money Ewmmnuni Figure 4. Comparison of Barriers Cited for School and Recreation Center Programs. 43 felt were needed and also state the location, time and the type of group interaction they would prefer for each new activity. This question was asked for three seasons, spring, summer and winter. Only those answers for the spring activities (the season at the time of interviewing) are used in this analysis due to the low responses for the other seasons. Twenty-two percent of the respondents were unable to think of any new activity. Those who did identify an activity (Table 11), were not always able to state their choice of location, time or group interaction. The percentage of respondents who did state locations, time and with whom for an activity were always smaller than the percentage who identified an activity. This could mean that even in those instances where a respondent identified an activity, she was not able to decide on time, location or the type of group she would prefer for the activity. The activities chosen by this group show a close relationship to activities that were already part of the recreation programs in Benton Harbor. No new activities (except skating) were suggested by more than a few respondents. Subjects were also presented with a prepared list of potential recreation activities. This question was placed at the end of the questionnaire to prevent this list from influencing their earlier responses, especially as to their choice of new activities, in the preceeding question. They were asked to rate their interest in each activity on a scale of 1 to 5 ranging from (1) definitely not interested, (2) probably not interested, (3) neutral, (4) some 44 Table 11 Suggestions of Activities for Spring Activities N Location % Time % Whom % School 62 Weekends 34 Mixed 62 Team Sports8 47 Park 34 Evenings 21 Girls 38 School 27 Mixed 64 Outdoorb ll Anytime 46 Park 18 Girls 36 School 33 Mixed 75 Swimming 12 Weekends 42 Rec.C. 25 Girls 25 Indoor/Clubc 14 School 21 Anytime 21 Mixed 29 aIncludes activities such as volleyball, basketball, track and field events. bIncludes out of town trips, camping, riding, or hiking. cIncludes dancing, choir, 4-H, music. interest and (5) much interest. These activities are listed in Table 12 in order of level of interest. Outdoor trips, penpal clubs, and big brother/sister clubs scored highest with most responses in the 4 and 5 categories. Sports activities, such as basketball, track and field, and tennis were not highly ranked. Apparently these programs, at least when offered at the recreation center, have less appeal. 45 Table 12 Interest Levels in Suggested Potential Activities e es se Increasing Interest Rank Program 1 2 3 4 5 Mean Type 1 Outdoor Trips 5 3 11 31 71 4.3 Social 2 Big Brother/Sister 5 4 12 34 66 4.2 Social 3 Penpal 9 5 12 27 68 4.1 Social 4 Makeup/Hairstyle 7 8 19 27 60 4.0 Glamour 5 Cooking 9 5 16 37 54 4.1 Social 6 Dancing 9 16 12 25 59 3.9 Social 7 Fitness/Aerobics l3 6 18 30 54 3.9 Glamour 8 Sewing/Fashions 7 12 21 34 47 3.8 Glamour 9 Swimming 15 8 14 29 55 3.8 Sports 10 Basketball 14 15 15 23 54 3.7 Sports 11 Singing/Music 17 16 12 28 48 3.6 Social 12 Softball 13 17 22 42 27 3.4 Sports 13 Gymnastics 22 13 19 36 31 3.3 Sports 14 Track and Field 19 16 20 37 29 3.3 Sports 15 Painting/Drawing 15 21 20 39 26 3.3 Cultural 16 Acting/Drama 14 20 26 35 26 3.3 Cultural 17 Tennis 22 16 22 35 26 3.3 Sports 18 Soccer 36 34 31 10 10 2.4 Sports 46 It is interesting to compare the responses from the fixed list with the open-ended question at the beginning of the interview (questions 5a, 5b and 5c). These questions were asked at the beginning to avoid the possibility of later questions about specific facilities or activities influencing responses. Each respondent was asked to describe what they did in their spare-time on typical days in the spring. This question permitted a free expression of any type of behavior, not necessarily recreation, in which respondents were engaged after school and on weekends. The responses were used to create a profile of the typical pattern of behavior of this teenage population. The activities in Figure 5 were compared with the levels of interest expressed in potential activities (Table 12), in order to determine if there were similarities or differences between what the respondents did and what they would like to do. Going to church on Sundays, hanging out in the mall on Saturdays and housework and television during the week were the most significant out of school activities. There was not much similarity, except for outdoor activities. The potential interests expressed for recreation activities may only have occurred because a list of activities were shown to the respondents. W A new combination of the activities and interest ratings was made to accomodate Chi-Square tests of relationships between recreation interests and other variables. 47 weekdays work televlelon church mall outdoor Figure 5. Spring Leisure Time Patterns by Days of the Week. 48 The 18 potential activities of Table 12 were grouped into four categories social, sports, cultural and glamour/image types of recreation activities as shown in Column 5 of Table 12. The values assigned to their interest in these activities were collapsed into three new categories (Table 13). This was done to ensure adequate numbers of responses in all the cells for Chi-Square tests and Table 13 Grouped Potential Activities and Ratings Activity Group N Meane Social Events8 121 2.4 Sportsb 121 1. 9 Culturalc 121 2 .4 Glamour/Imaged 121 2.3 aIncludes all activities with social interactions,dancing, indoor club activities, cooking, big-brother/big-sister and penpal bSports included are volleyball, basketball, soccer and track and field events cPainting, drawing, art, acting, and drama dSewing, fashion, makeup, hairstyles, fitness activities eAverage for all activities in the group the high response in the ratings of 4 and 5. The not interested category remained the same. Probably some interest was coded as 2 and high interest was coded as 3 (Table 13). 49 Hypothesis 1. Previous participation in recreation activities was one of the variables believed to affect levels of interest in activities. The relationship between participation at parks, in schools and at the recreation was tested with the interest expressed for each of the four categories of activities (Table 13). No significant relationship existed between park participation and any of the 4 categories of activities (Table 14). No significant relationship existed between participation in school recreation programs and the 4 activities. Recreation center participation produced the only relationships significant at the 0.05 level. There is a relationship between participation at the recreation center and interest in sports and glamour/image. Recreation center participation showed a total 32% of participants and 63% nonparticipants. Of those expressing high interest, 8% of the participants had no interest in sports while 92% of the nonparticipants had no interest in sports, while 45% of participants showed a very high level of interest and 55% of the nonparticipants showed a high interest in sports. For those participants who showed concern for glamour/image 4% indicated no interest, 96% of the nonparticipants had no interest in glamour/image while 40% of participants showed very much interest and 60% of nonparticipants showed high levels of interest. This group of recreation center participants is probably interested in competitive athletics and may also be less inhibited by barriers to participation than those in the other two groups. 50 Table 14 Chi-square Test of Relationship between Respondent Participation and Interest in Potential Activities Observed Activity Chi-Square df Significance Level Wm Social Events 2.36 2 0.30 Sports 4.45 2 0.10 Cultural 1.21 2 0.55 Glamour/Image 0.33 2 0.84 W Social Events 1.47 2 0.48 Sports 5.70 2 0.06 Cultural 0.72 2 0.69 Glamour/Image 0.66 2 0.72 e e Social Events 3.78 2 0.15 Sports 11.23 2 0.00 Cultural 2.93 2 0.23 Glamour/Image 10.90 2 0.00 51 Hypothesis 2. Age was another variable thought to affect both participation in organized recreation activities and interest in potential activities. It was assumed that the grade levels of the respondents would be a reflection of their age, so the grades were combined into three categories. Grades 7 and 8 were combined into one, grades 9 and 10 into another and grades 11 and 12 into the third category. Using these new age categories, the hypothesized relationships between participation in school and recreation center activities (Table 15), and interest in activities (Table 16) were tested with Table 15 Relationship Between Age and Participation in Organized Recreation Programs Participation Chi-Square df Significance Level School Activities 2.66 2 0.26 Recreation Center Activities 0.95 2 0.62 Chi-Square. Null hypotheses could not be rejected at the 0.05 probability level. It can therefore be concluded that there are no significant relationships between (1) the age of the subjects and their participation in organized recreation programs, and (2) the age of the subjects and potential interest in recreation programs. 52 Table 16 Relationship Between Age and Potential Interest in Recreation Programs Activity Chi-Square df Significance Level Social Events 3.49 4 0.48 Sports 1.03 4 0.90 Cultural 2.06 4 0.73 Glamour/Image 3.67 4 0.45 CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This final chapter provides a summary of the major research findings of this study. The objectives are re-examined, the results summarized, and implications and recommendations for the city of Benton Harbor are described. Implementation strategies for the city's Department of Recreation are suggested in light of these results. Some recommendations for further studies are also made. Summary One of the objectives of this study was to determine whether female adolescents in Benton Harbor were aware of the recreational facilities and opportunities available to them at the parks, the schools, and the city's recreation center, and if so, to determine the level of participation in the facilities and the programs offered. To achieve this objective, students were asked about the locations of the parks, and the types of programs that were offered at the schools and the recreation center. Lack of knowledge was not a major problem as a substantial percentage of the sample were aware of all three types of opportunities at the neighborhood parks, the schools and the recreation center programs. Respondents were least aware of the recreation center programs, which also had a lower participation rate. There was not a high emphasis in the questionnaire on the level of knowledge, which could have differed from mere awareness of the existence of a facility. 53 54 How did adolescent females learn about the existing programs? Sources of information about recreation opportunities showed that announcements and notices from the recreation center only reached 24% of the students interviewed. No single communication medium was cited by more than 25% of the respondents for the recreation center programs. School announcements appeared to be far more successful in targeting students. The recreation center should consider some different strategies for reaching adolescent females, such as channelling communications through the schools and the churches. Not everyone aware of recreation facilities participated in programs. About half of the students visited the local parks and participated in school programs, and 32% participated in programs at the recreation center. It was unfortunate that the sample was not questioned about the frequency with which they participated in these activities, for this would have provided useful insight into the degree of participation that occurred. The perception by recreation personnel in Benton Harbor that female participation in recreation programs was extremely low was not supported by the findings of this study. Only seventeen percent of the respondents never participated in any type of activity or program that was described but over 50% participated in school and park programs. Lack of interest and concerns for safety are the major barriers to participation cited by female adolescents. At the parks, more than half the sample did not perceive any barriers, although safety 55 and security was cited by 34%. Lack of interest was rated as a very important barrier to participation at the recreation center, indicating that lack of knowledge of the programs, coupled with a lack of interest influence the low participation rate. Money and transportation are barriers that are also significant, especially in an area like Benton Harbor, with high welfare, unemployment and lack of a public transportation system. The lack of money as a barrier could not be related to fees for programs, as these are very minimal. It may be perceived as a barrier to participating in other activities outside the city, which require fees and transportation. The recreation center is situated in an area not easily accessible to the average resident in Benton Harbor, so that lack of transportation is a real problem. When asked about interest in other recreation activities most students could not identify activities in which they would like to participate. The high percentage of those who did not know (which may be equated to "could not think of" any new activities) added to those others who chose familiar activities such as team sports can be interpreted as an inability of the population to identify and express its own needs. All respondents were encouraged as much as possible to think of some activity they would really like to have offered. Social events, with a high emphasis on mixed social interactions are activities with the greatest potential interest. When this potential interest in recreation activities is examined with the actual spring activity patterns of this group, it can be seen that "hanging out” at the mall on Saturdays and going to 56 church on Sundays are very prevalent. The high percentage of those who ”hang out" at malls and the high interest shown in such activities like make-up, fashion hairstyles, suggest activities that could be incorporated into some type of program held at the mall, where teenagers can interact with each other in a location and activity of their choice. Shopping malls may welcome a chance to regulate the presence of youths (especially females) who are constantly "hanging out” there and they may be persuaded to sponsor some of the programs themselves. Recreation administrators have to recognize the value attached to "hanging out” and use this type of unstructured activity as part of their recreation programming in a suitable setting. Television could be one medium for advertising programs as a public service announcement because so many in the population spend time looking at television. Since the schools were more sucessful at advertising their programs, they represent another means of targeting this adolescent group. There is very little mention of church activities, such as choirs, or out of town trips sponsored by the church, even though the highest response to activities in spring is going to church. The church sponsors out of town trips during summer for one or two weeks. Although the church does provide certain avenue for teenage activities these may not be viewed as recreational activities by this population. Churches represent a potential provider of other recreation type activities, for in the city of Benton Harbor there are 114 registered churches (there may be more) serving a population 57 of just over fourteen thousand. There is a strong element of church-going in this population, so churches may be utilized as a place where some types of activities can be initiated, especially as indoor club activities, or out of town trips. at w l. The population surveyed consisted only of registered students who were currently attending school, so the adolescents who had dropped out of school were not represented. However, those attending school probably constitute 85 to 95% of the city's adolescent female population so the sample should be fairly representative of the individuals in this group. It should be recognized that school drop-outs are a special part of the population that may be in more need of special recreation programs than those attending schools. 2. A total of 121 interviews out of a potential 200 were completed. The proportion of the sample that was difficult to locate may represent a bias to the results, for these persons may have quite different needs and interests. 3. The City of Benton Harbor appeared to have a highly mobile population as evidenced by the difficulty in locating parents through the mail or by telephone. In cases where telephone calls had to be made, there were several instances of wrong numbers, disconnected numbers 58 or refusals to answer the telephone during the day (as suggested by local interviewers). The advantages of having two interviewers who lived in the community and who were familiar with the its conditions, helped to solve many of these problems. These conditions clearly are more serious problems for survey research here than in more affluent urban environments. Social surveys in Benton Harbor were a sensitive issue. Community leaders have complained that there were too many studies and too few tangible results. The MSU-Benton Harbor project began at a time when the political climate was already unstable, and the cooperation of key members in the community had to be carefully nurtured. This meant having to cope with long delays, and spending a lot of time in the community prior to doing the survey. The success of the study depended on the cooperation of people not directly a part of the sample population such as school administrators and parents. The timing of the study was a problem as all the interviews had to be completed by the end of the school year. It took much longer than anticipated to arrange for interviewing in the schools and to obtain the necessary parental permission. The actual interviewing had to be conducted within a fairly short period just before the end of the school year. 59 6. No socioeconomic data about the respondents' households were collected. Key informants in the community suggested that any attempts to incorporate such questions in the survey would create antagonism because of the high proportion of welfare recipients. The major focus of the research was confined to collecting information on the recreation behavior of individuals. While previous research has indicated that socioeconomic factors are important determinants of recreation participation patterns, and such data would have been extremely useful for the more academic aspects of this investigation, it was not considered essential for the development of recreation programming recommendations for Benton Harbor. 7. Sampling errors with a sample size of 121 are between 6 and 10 percent for estimating simple percentages for binary responses such as 'yes' and 'no '. Estimates based on subgroups of the sample generally have sampling errors larger than 10 percent. These errors must be considered in interpreting the results. In licati c e o e su t f e to Harbo What are some of the implications for these results for the public agency recreation administrators and personnel in Benton Harbor? The present programs of the recreation Department primarily focus on athletics and sports, with highly competitive events taking priority. These hold little appeal for the adolescent 60 female. A wider variety of programs for females, with less competitiveness and a higher emphasis on social interactions are recommended. Since "hanging out” at various locations is the most important female adolescent activity, indicating the attractiveness of non- formal, unstructured types of interaction, recreation providers should find ways to make "hanging out" more than just a vague social interaction. There may be ways to introduce a new dimension to public recreation programs by keeping them relatively unstructured but still providing activities while "hanging out”. One method of doing this would be providing some club type activities at churches and neighborhood parks. Clubs such as hiking or camping clubs could provide for the respondents' high levels of interest in trips at locations perceived as being both attractive and safe. There is also a need for more professionally trained and experienced recreation personnel to plan, operate, and evaluate programs for female adolescents. New programs or experimentation with creative ideas requires people with suitable skills and abilities to do so. Broader types of programs will need staff with more qualifications than just knowledge of sport activities. A trained staff would be able to evaluate and monitor their own performance and possibly bring some creativity into their programming or influence those who do. The present recreation personnel in Benton Harbor, although hard working and enthusiastic, have had little opportunity for training in recreation planning or programming. In a survey of U.S. local parks and leisure service 61 agencies Godbey and Henkel (1977), found only 40% of full-time staff in local leisure service agencies had post-high school education in recreation and parks or a related area. Benton Harbor is situated on Lake Michigan, with plenty of opportunity for water-based recreation activities. No mention was ever made of these types of activities by the respondents, even though access to the waterfront is possible for swimming or picnicking. This may be a reflection of a group not really identifying with activities like boating or fishing, especially if money is perceived as a problem or the activity is perceived as being male dominated. However, when the waterfront development plan for Benton Harbor is realized, including the building of extensive marinas and tourist facilities, there would be some impacts on this community. Some of these may include a wider range of opportunity for recreation activities. A small community like Benton Harbor where church attendance is high, and where, neighborhood organizations are becoming active, has the potential for developing community-based recreation activities that can be church-sponsored or neighborhood-sponsored if the recreation department can be persuaded to work with church and neighborhood groups. Within the past year, a new neighborhood organization called Neighborhood Information and Sharing Exchange (NISE) has emerged as a very noticeable presence in the Benton Harbor community. The city has been divided into 21 small neighborhoods as part of its strategy to mobilize local community support to help build and revitalize the 62 city. The organizations objectives include improving housing, promoting economic development, implementing crime prevention tactics using local groups and putting more emphasis on youth through education and recreation (NISE Summary Report, 1987). This is one avenue to utilize the community members and create unique programs to serve recreation needs. Su est n o the e There has been no previous study of male or female participation behavior or attitudes in recreation in Benton Harbor. A comparative study of teenage males in this city would be useful for more comprehensive recreation planning and programming. The lack of documented data on any type of male or female preferences or participation indicates a need for creating some data base for future studies and programming. The study only sampled students attending school. Further research is needed to identify the recreation needs of a population who are school dropouts, who may be single mothers, or may have idifficulties that are quite different from others in their peer group. The drop-out rate of students in Benton Harbor is estimated to be 12.7%, fifth highest rate in Michigan. A study of this type could also be compared to national studies of general population recreation attitudes and preferences. A comparison of similar data for a predominantly white, middle class population may provide useful contrasts. It could help emphasize the differences that must be taken into account when developing 63 recreation programs for an inner city population that may have considerably different interests. APPENDIX (Fifth draft 5/29/87) M.C. 1. 0 an ass YOU ______________ 2. . GOOD! WHY DON'T YOU COME OVER HERE AND SIT BY ME SO WE CAN TAUI. School 6 grade [6 I I I (For office use only) Neighborhood I ll 1 3. . ("Ice breaker” comment regarding clothing. jewelry. make-up. or hair.) 4. . AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW, WE ARE MAKING A SURVEY OF WHAT GIRLS/YOUNG WOMEN DO IN THEIR SPARE TIME IN ORDER TO HELP THE CITY PIAN ITS PARK AND RECREATION PROGRAMS . . ALL WE NEED TO KNOW IS WHAT KINDS OF THINGS m LIKE TO DO FOR FUN. . YOUR ANSWERS WILL BE KEPT SECRET. . NO ONE IN THE SCHOOL OR CITY WILL SEE THEM. . YOU DO NOT ME TO TAKE PART IF YOU DON'T WANT TO. 0 YOUR GRADES WILL NOT BE AFFECTED WHETHER YOU DO OR DON'T. a DO YOU wws ANY QUESTIONS? 9 10 (Topics): [ l I l 11 12 I I I I 13 1!. I I I I e ass you WILLING 10 ms PART? as D no 0 ' 0 (If ‘NO', thank student and terminate interview) 64 65 B. W . O.K. . LETS TALK FIRST ABOUT WHAT YOU DO AT THIS TIME OF YEAR. 5a. .WHAT DO YOU USUALLY DO AFTER SCHOOL? (Prompt if necessary but w mention any specific activities) 0 - DO YOU GO STRAIGHT HOME? . - WHERE AND HOW LONG DO YOU __7 Q - DO YOU BY YOURSELF? 0R. - WHO DO YOU WITH? (Interviewer draws and labels lines to indicate activities. * ACTIVITIE * 7.1m * 2.122s * HIIII £312! 29m 3 i. s 6 7 s 9 1o 11 12 see ““1 (Notes: )« 5b. .muvr no you usuaux DO now on SATURDAY? .WHERE AND HOW IDNG DO YOU 7 6 0 DO YOU BY YOURSELF? OR .W‘HO DO YOU WITH? lpm2345 H! Ban 9 10 ll 12 (Notes: 10 ll ll I I I56 5c.. WHAT DO YOU DO ON SUNDAY AT THIS TIME OF YEAR? .WHEREANDHOWIDNGDOYOU ? . DO YOU BY YOURSELF? OR 0 WHO DO YOU WITH? Sam 9 10 ll 12 1pm 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (Notes: 10 ll 12 ) 6. .WERE YOUR SPARE TIME ACTIVITIES DIFFERENT IN THE WINTER? a. . WHAT DID YOU DO AFTER SCHOOL IN THE WINTER? . WHERE AND HOW LONG DID YOU ? . DID YOU BY YOURSELF? 0R 0 WHO DID YOU WITH? I 2pm 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 (Notes: 3 71 72 73 7a 1 I l I I I 75 76 77 78 I l I l I l I 79 so 81 82 I I l I I I 83 ea 85 86 I I I I I I 87 as 89 90 I l I l I I I 91 92 93 94 I l I l I l I 95 96 97 98 I I I I I l I l 99 100 101 102 l I l I l I l 67’ 6b..WHAT DID YOU DO ON SATURDAYS IN THE WINTER? 0 WHERE AND HOW LONG DID YOU ? C DID YOU BY YOURSELF? OR 0 WHO DID YOU WITH? 8n 9 10 11 12 1;). 2 3 5 10 11 12 (Notes: ) c. . WHAT DID YOU DO ON SUNDAYS IN THE WINTER? 0 WHERE AND HOW LONG DID YOU ? O DID YOU DY YOURSELF? OR 0 WHO DID YOU WITH? 811111 9 10 11 12 1pm 2 5 10 11 12 (Notes: I 119 I 123 I 127 I 131 I 1016 108 I 112 I 116 120 l I I 126 I I 132 I I I 126 a 105 106 I I I 109 110 I I I 113 116 I I I 117 118 121 122 I I I I 125 126 l I I I 129 130 I I l I 133 134 I I l I I l l l I58 5 7a..WHAT 00 you USUALLy 00 IN THE SUHHER VHEN SCHOOL IS OUT?? OIWHERB AND HOU LONG 00 you ? I100 you By YOURSELF? 0R --- 135 136 137 138 oxmoooyou WITH? III II III 139 140 161 142 l l I l l l l J l l l l I l I l I I I l 163 166 165 166 8.. 9 10 11 12 1p. 2 3 6 5 6 8 IIIIIIII 167 168 169 150 I l I l I I I I * _ 7 O‘— p O p-o H H N (Notes: 151 152 153 156 7b.IN THE SUMMER. 00 you USUALLy TAKE PART IN ANY SPECIAL ACTIVITIES I I I I I I I I OR 00 ON ANy TRIPS? 155 156 157 158 I I I 0 WHAT. VHERE. AND HOW LONG? 159 160 161 162 I I I I I I I I OWITH WHOM? 163 166 165 166 <fi I I I I I I I I 7c. .00 you ENJOY THOSE SUHHER ACTIVITIES? I67] :53] 169 170 . I I I I 171 172 I I I I 173 176 I I I I IIIIIlI=E=====i===============================================================I 8. . you HAVE TOLD ME THAT you TAKE PART IN THE FOLLOWING FUN ACTIVITIES (give 118C.) 175 176 8a. 0 WHICH ONE 15 you: FAVORITE? I I I I 8b.4. WHY? 177 178 I I I I 8c. 0 WHICH ONE Is yOUR SECOND HOST FAVORITE? 179 130 I I It 8d. 0 WHICH ONE 00 you LIKE THE LEAST? 1 181 .182 II WHY? I I I I 4IIIIIIIIlIlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIU 183 18“ I II I 185 186 187 188 I I I I I II I (59 m C- W- 9e. .00 YOU KNOW THE NAMES AND LOCATIONS OF THE TWO CITY PARKS NEAREST TO YOUR HOME? 0 Name Perk 1. None Park 2. O Location 1. Location 2. (Notes: 9b. .HAVE YOU BEEN TO THOSE PARKS AND, IF SO. WHAT DID YOU DO THERE? CHILE—13 YESCI : no Elem: YES [3 ; not] (skip to (Skip to 9d) 9d) 0 Activities 1: ll 0 Activities 2: 9c. .00 YOU LIKE THAT PARK/THOSE PARKS? . WHY/WHY NOT? 9d. .IS THERE ANYTHING WHICH PREVENTS YOU FROM GOING TO/GOING HORE OFTEN TO . . . . THAT PARK/THOSE TWO PARKS? 108.HAVE you BEEN TO ANY OTHER CITY PARKS? IF so, WHAT 010 you 00 THERE? YES 0 N0 D (Skip to 10¢) C Perl: 3. Chris lo. 0 Locetion 3. Question A. 0 Activities 3. .Activities lo. 189 I 191 192 I I I II 190 I I 193 196195 196 I I II I I I 197' 198 199 200 I II 213 216 215 I I|I I I I 218 219 220 I I I I I I J I I I I 202 203 I I I I 205 206 I I I I 208‘ 209 I 211 212 I 216 217 I I 221 222 I I I I I I I I I l I I I 70 7 10b .00 YOU LIKE THAT/THOSE PARK(s)? 226 225 226 I II I I I . VHY OR WHY NOT? 227 228 229 I I I I I I 10c..IS THERE ANYTHING wHICH PREVENTS YOU PROH COINC TO/COINC HORE OPTEN To THAT PARK/THOSE PARKS? 230 231 232 I I I II I 233 236 235 I I I I I I 11. .00 you KNOW AEOUT ANY SPARE TIHE ACTIVITY PROCRAHS OPPERED AT THE SCHOOLS?..OR THE PARKS 0R RECREATION CENTER? AT THE SCHOOLS § § AT PARKS OR CENTER 5%“ am“ .1. KNOW AEOUT? _’ YES ; NO YEs ; NO 236 263 W I I I I eb. 11' -YES-. WHICH: PROGRAMS? 1.1-: 2.9 H 237 260 266 267 3" I l I I I II I LOCATIONS? 13> :38] €41 265 268 I I I I 21> 2:391:42 266 269 l I I I I 3.9 250 253 e c. HOW 010 YOU [ 1 I ) PINO OUT _' 251 256 AEOUT THEN? I 1 I J 252 255 I 1 I I .d. HAVE you TAKEN YESU ; No YES ; No 256 263 PART IN ANY 0 n D I I I I SCHOOL OR ( 257 258 266 265 PARKS/RC _ I I I I I II I PROORAHS. IF I 239 260 266 267 "YES”. WHICH ONES? I I 1 I 1 l 261 262 268 269 I I I I I I I I 71. 8 Mac Pa k . WOULD you LIKE YES ; No YES NO fiz—k 277 ' " TO TAKE PART I I (TAKE PART HORE) l :78] IN SUCH SPARE TIKE :71] :72] I I f79 OC S? P SYESWWHATIHAS 273 27“ 280 281 PREVENTED xgu PROH I II I I I I DOINC SO? . f751276 :82] :83 r I I KI 286 285 290 291 .f.WHATDOYOUTHIN I II II ][ I KEEPS OTHER GIRLS 286 237 292 293 PROH DOINC SO? I I I I I I I I 288 289 296 295 I I I I I I I I 12.. HERE IS A LIST OP THINCS THAT HAVE KEPT 5mm PROH TAKINC PART IN APTER SCHOOL PROCRAHS. E 0 DO ANY OP THEN APPLY TO you ? (write in numbers st 10ft). 296 297 NO.__ Very little ( ) Little ( ) SOIe ( ) A Lot ( ) Ver ( ). I I I 1 298 299 No.__ () () (1 <) ()- III] 300 301 No.__. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ). I 1 I j "" "' 302 303 13 HOW lflEQBIAEI WOULD you SAY THEY WERE? (Check above)il 13.. HERE Is A LIST OP THINGS THAT HAVE KEPT W PROH TAKINC PART IN PROCRAHS AT PARKS AND THE RECREATION CENTER. r 0 DO ANY OF THEM APPLY TO YOU 7 (write in numbers at left). No ___ Very little I ) Little ( ) Some ( ) A Lot ( ) Ver ( ). 30“ 305 M96 __._- I I I I No._ ( ) < ) ( ) ( ) ( ). 1:06] 1:07 No._ ( ) ( ) ( ) I ) ( ). 308 309 _L_ I I I N0._ ( ) ( I ( I ( ) I ). 310 311 . HOW W WOULD YOU SAY THEY WERE? (Check above) ‘ W . NOW I WANT TO FINISH UP BY TALKING ABOUT WHAT HE SPARE TIHE ACTIVITIES ARE NEEDED . '72 _ = 4 A _ 16a..IP you COULD PICK TVO NEW ACTIVITIES FOR THE HONTHS. WHAT WOULD you PICK. m5 SHOULD THEY BE OPPERED. AT HHAT Ilufifi. AND Hug WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO THEN UITH? ' (What) (Where) (When) (WHO) 0 ml Choice 312 313 314 315 316 I II II II II I Q #2 Choice 317 318 319 320 321 I II II II II I 1615.11E YOU COULD PICK TVO ACTIVITIES POR THE mm. M WOULD you PICK. mg; SHOULD THEY DE OPPERED. AT WHAT mas. AND m WOULD you LIKE To Do THEN HITH?? (What) (Where) (When) (WHO) . ’1 Choice 322 323 3216 325 326 I II II II II I g «2 Choice 327 328 329 330 331 I II II II II I J 16c ..IF YOU COULD PICK TVO ACTIVITIES POR THE W PERIOD, and: WOULD you PICK. Hung: SHOULD THEY BE OPPERED. AT WHAT 115:5. AND Hug WOULD you LIKE To DO THEN UITH? (What) (Whore) (when) (WHO) 332 333 336 335 336 IIIIIIIIII 337 338 339 360 361 I II II II II I Q 31 Choice 0 I82 Choice IO 73 a u 15.. HOW INTERESTED WOULD YOU BE IN TAKING PART IN ANY OF THESE ACTIVITIES? (Show flash card) (check one box on each line) 0’. afoot-noon HA'UOQBt-Ix‘i. Level of Interest Activity Definitely Probably Neutral V Not Not Track 6 Field Soccer Softball Tennis Basketball Gymnastics Swimming Fitness/aerobics Hake up/hairstyle Cooking Sewing/fashions Dance classes Singing music Acting/drama Painting/drawing Outdoor trips Big Brother/sister Pen Pal Club Some TSP Soccer Softball Tennis B.Ball Gym. Swim. Fit/A. Hake up Cooking Saving Dance Singing Acting Painting Trips Big B. Pen Pal _e—vn—se—ae—eh—u—e—e—Haue—‘e—eh—nh— 342 343 346 345 346 367 348 369 350 351 352 353 356 355 356 357 358 359 74. " ‘—Ti================I===ll====I=IIIL _— l6..HOW HUCH WOULD ANY OP THESE IDEAS HAKE 1T EASIER POR YOU TO TAKE PART IN SPARE TIHE ACTIVITIES? (Show flash card) Idea Definitely Probably Neutral Somewhat Very (Write in) 5‘ No Hel No Help Hal ful Hel fuI V" v Y 5 I 17..DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR SUGGESTIONS ABOUT EXISTING OR NEEDED SPARE TIHE PROGRAMS? :=================================================================l=lllll . THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP! (Appropriate Closing Remarks.) 11 360 361 362 I II II I 363 366 365 I II II 366 367 368 I II I I 369 370 371 I I II II II 372 373 376 I I 375 376 377 I II II I 378 379 I II 380 381 I I II I 382 383 I 386 385 I II II I I REFERENCES REFERENCES Books Abbey-Livingston, D. and Abbey, D.S. (1982). Enjoying Research? " ow- 0" Ma u ee sse e . Toronto, Ontario: Ministry of Tourism and Recreation. Babbie, E.R. (1973). fig:xg1_fig§g§1§h4ug§hggg. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing. Bannon. JJ. (1976). WWW. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Chubb M and Chubb HR (1981) WW1 W New York, New YOrk: John Wiley & Sons. Dunn, D.R. (1979). Cited in Kraus, R. (1984). Beg;ga§ign_ang Lg1§2;g_in_uggg;n_§ggiggy‘ Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman. Godbey. G. and ParkeS. S. (1976). WWW ngrxigg. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. W.B. Saunders. Gold, S.M. (1973). uzban_figg;g§§12n_zlgnning. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger. Goodale, T.L. and Witt, P.A. (1980). a r ° Is ues 1n_§n_£ra_gf_§h§ngg. University Park, Pennsylvania: Venture Publishing Co. Harrington, M. (1962). Ihg_Q;h§;_Amgriga. Baltimore, Maryland: Penguin Books. Hodges, G.G., and Bradburn, F.B. (1985). Reggazgh on Adolescence fo t ce' at h do esce W Chicago, Illinois: American Library Association. Kraus. RC. (1964). WW2 WW figggsgzship, New York, N.Y.: Macmillan. 75 76 Kraus, R. (1972). Urban Parka ana Racgaatinn; Challenge of the 19ZO'a. New York, New York: Community Council of Greater New York and the New York Foundation. Kraus, R. and Curtis, J.E. (1982). Czaative Management in Rag;aa§19n_an§_£a1ka. St. Louis, Missouri: The C.V. Mosby Company. Marans, R.W., Driver, B.L., and Scott, J.C. (1972). Inn§n_ang_§na __1V.°!!I‘! ' all TV:__ -: .19 0. I‘ ’ 0 1 01:6. atio C..s, Ann Arbor, Michigan: Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan. Marans, R. W. and Fly, J. M. (1981). o e 1 t rb: :a o; _ - 1 v . - 10 Iv: a o; . W Ann Arbor Michigan Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan. Pelegrino, D.A. (1979). Eeaeazan Mathgda for Recreation and Leisure; WW2. Dubuque. Iowa: Wm. C. Brown. Shivers, J.S.and Helper, W. (1981). Ina inaia in Urban fiacreational fiazxiaa. London, England: Associated University Presses. Shoebridge, M. (1987). ' e London, Eng1and: Mansell Publishing Ltd. Stein. TA and Seasons. D. (1973). W (2nd ed.). Boston, Mass.: Holbrook Press. Wilson. WJ (1987) W W321. Chicago Illinois: The University of Chicago Press. rt e 0 Allen, L.R. and Donnelly, M.A. (1985). "An Analysis of the Social Unit of Participation and the Perceived Psychological Outcomes Associated with Most Enjoyable Recreation Activities." Laianza fiaianaaa. 1(2): 421-441. Aworuwa. 0. (1985). WWW I;an§a_f;an_1219_§n_12§&. East Lansing, Mi.: Center for Urban Affairs. Michigan State University, Benton Harbor Project Library. East Lansing, Mi.: Center for Urban Affairs, Michigan State University. 77 Bettelheim, B. (1987). "The Importance of Play." n ic, June, 1987, pp. 35-46. Clark, R.M. (1974). “The Dance Party as a Socialization Mechanism for Black Urban Pro-adolescents and Adolescents.” WW. 3(2). 145-154. Deyak, T.A. and Parliment, T. (1975). ”Analysis of Youth Participa- tion at Urban Recreation Facilities." Lann_§annnniaa, 5(2), 172-176. Godbey, G. and Kraus, R. (1973). "Citizen Participation in Urban Recreation Decision “chins" W. 5(3), 155—160. Godbey, G. (1985). "Non-use of Public Leisure Services: A Model." MW. (3)2. 1-13. Goldstein, J.E. (1983). ”Women Striving: Pursuing the Physical Challenge.” Wigs. EU). 70-81. Hatry, Harry P., et al, 1977. How Effective Are Your Community Services? Washington, 0.0.: The Urban Institute. Hauser, P. M. (1962). ”Demographical and Ecological Changes as Factors in Outdoor Recreation " W W Washington D C Government Printing Office. Hennessy, B.F. (1983). ”At Risk: Physical Fitness in the School Programs." W. 13112). 34-36. Howard, D.R. and Crompton, J.L. (1984). "Who are the Consumers of Public Park and Recreation Services? An Analysis of Users and Non-Users of Three Municipal Leisure Service Organizations". MW. 2(3). 33-48. Jackson, E.L. and Dunn, E. (1987). ”Ceasing Participation in Recreation Activities: A Conceptualization and Empirical Investigation." Paper presented at the Fifth Canadian Congress on Leisure Research, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Novia Scotia. Kamiar, M. (1987). "Changes in Benton Harbor's Patterns of Population Composition: 1950-1980.” Center for Urban Affairs, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. Kraus, R. and Charles, L. (1986). "Ethnic and Racial Minorities in Urban Recreation.” President's Commission on Americans Outdoors. A Literature Review. 78 Lindsay, J.J. and Ogle, R.A. (1977). "Socioeconomic Patterns of Outdoor Recreation Use near Urban Areas.” Journal of Leisure Research. 5; 19-24. McDonald, J.M., and Hutchison, I.J. (1986). Minority and Ethnic Variations in Outdoor Recreation Participation: Trends and Issues. President's Commission on Americans Outdoors. A Literature Review. More, T.A., Stevens, T.F., and Allen, P.G. (1982). "The Economics of Urban Parks: A Benefit/Cost Analysis". £arka_ang Recreation. 17(8):3—33. Mueller, E., Gurin, G., and Wood, M. (1962). Participation in Outdoor Recreation: Factors Affecting Demand Among American Adults. ORRRC Study Report 20. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. Mundy, J. (1984). ”What Prevents People from Enjoying Leisure?" Wagon. 12(9). 64-66. Neighborhood Information and Sharing Exchange: A Summary Report. (1987). Benton Harbor, Michigan. Recreation Resource Consultants. (1972). "Recreation in the Lansing Model Cities Area: A Study of Spare-time Behavior and Attitudes.” Report No. 1. East Lansing, MI: Recreation Resource Consultants. Robinson, J.P. (1986). “Time Use and Outdoor Recreation.” Survey Research Center, University of Maryland. President's Commission on Americans Outdoors. A Literature Review. Searle, M.S. and Jackson, E.L. (1985). "Socioeconomic Variations in Perceived Barriers to Recreation Participation Among Would-be Participants.” Laianra_§a1anaaa, 1(2). 227-249. Spotts, D.M. and Stynes, D.J. (1984). "Public Awareness and Knowledge of Urban Parks: A Case Study." Jangnal of Park and MW. 2(4). 1-12. Stynes, D.J., Spotts, D.M., and Strunk, J.R. (1985). ”Relaxing Assumptions of Perfect Information in Park Visitation Models." WW. 31(1). 21-28- Tiefenbach, R. (1986). Center for Cartographic Research and Spatial Analysis. East Lansing, Mi.: Department of Geography, Michigan State University. 79 Twardzik, L.F. and Haskell, T.J. (1982). Review of Berrien County Park, Recreation and Tourism Systems. East Lansing: Michigan State University, Department of Park and Recreation Resources. University of Wisconsin, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences Research Division, 1974. Characteristics and Recreational Participation Patterns of Low Income, Inner-city Residents. Madison, Wisconsin. U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States (1984). Washington, D.C. Government Printing Office. U.S. Department of the Interior. (1977). Heritege_§2n§erxation_aad Resreati2n_Serxise_and_Nat12nal_Park_§erxice. National Urban Recreation Study: Executive Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Wagner, F.W., and Donahue, T.R. (1976). "The Impact of Inflation and Recession on Urban Leisure in New Orleans." lanrnal_nf_La1an1a Reaearan, 8(4): 300-306. Washburne, R.F. (1978). "Black Underparticipation in Wildland Recreation: Alternative Explanations." Laisnze Sciancea 1: 175-189. Yancey, W.L., and Snell, J. (1971)."Parks as Aspects of Leisure in the Inner City: An Exploratory Investigation.” Paper presented at the American Association for the Advancement of Science Meetings in Philadelphia. Yerkes, R. and Miranda, W. (1985). ”Women Outdoors: Who are They?" Park§_ang_fiesreatien. 2Q(3). 48-51. Personal_lnterziess Brown, Carl. Director, Department of Public Works and Recreation, Benton Harbor, Michigan. Little, Alex. City Manager, City Hall, Benton Harbor Michigan. Rutter, James. Principal, Benton Harbor High School, Benton Harbor, Michigan. Yarbrough, Glen. Director, Charles Gray Recreation Center, Benton Harbor, Michigan. ICHIGRN STRTE UNIV. LIBRARIES llIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHIIIIIHIIIIIIIHl 31293010825200