PERSONALITY TYPES AND LEARNING STYLES: AN INVESTIGATION OF THEIR INFLUENCE ON PERFORMANCE IN A DISTANCE EDUCATION ENVIRONMENT by Stacey Lynn Rimmerman M.Ed., The University of West Florida, 1997 B.A., The University of West Florida, 1995 A dissertation submitted to the Department of Instructional and Performance Technology College of Professional Studies The University of West Florida In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education 2005
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
PERSONALITY TYPES AND LEARNING STYLES: AN INVESTIGATION OF
THEIR INFLUENCE ON PERFORMANCE IN A DISTANCE EDUCATION
ENVIRONMENT
by
Stacey Lynn Rimmerman
M.Ed., The University of West Florida, 1997
B.A., The University of West Florida, 1995
A dissertation submitted to the Department of Instructional and Performance Technology College of Professional Studies The University of West Florida
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education
2005
ii
The dissertation of Stacey Lynn Rimmerman is approved: ______________________________________________ __________________ Sandra L. Davis, Committee Member Date ______________________________________________ __________________ Nancy N. Maloy, Committee Member Date ______________________________________________ __________________ Sherri L. Zimmerman, Committee Member Date ______________________________________________ __________________ Karen L. Rasmussen, Committee Chair Date Accepted for the Department/Division: ______________________________________________ __________________ Karen L. Rasmussen, Chair Date Accepted for the College: ______________________________________________ __________________ Don Chu, Dean Date Accepted for the University: ______________________________________________ __________________ Richard S. Podemski, Dean Date Office of Graduate Studies
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Completing this research paper has been both exasperating and exhilarating and I
am thankful for the support and assistance I have received at each stage of the process.
Without the encouraging and loyal attitudes of my family, friends, and academic mentors,
I could not have completed this passage.
My warmest gratitude goes to my immediate family for their patience,
understanding, and encouragement. Never again will you see me read through my
research while sitting through a movie, on a camping trip, or on an outing to the beach.
My children, Erin and Michael, you have been my grandest source of inspiration since
the day you were born. This degree is really for you. Charley, you sacrificed your time to
chauffeur two teens, make dinner any time I was too tired from writing, and rubbed my
back regularly when I had been sitting at my desk for too long. Your constant love and
kindness has been very instrumental in the completion of this project; you’re the best!
I am grateful to my parents, Pat and Don, who gave me the opportunity to build
confidence in my abilities and presented me with an appreciation for knowledge and
education that is unparalleled by anything else in my life.
My dear friend and colleague, Laura Colo—you have gracefully taken my hand
and led me through this journey with wisdom, patience, and honor. I am absolutely
certain that I would not have finished this degree without your unconditional friendship
iv
and encouragement at each of my small successes. You were my beacon through the
roughest of storms. Thank you.
Sincere appreciation goes to my chairperson, Karen Rasmussen, who pushed me
to do my best and kindly guided me towards accomplishment. I am also grateful to
Morris Marx who, very patiently and thoughtfully, spent many hours helping me analyze
statistics. Additionally, I am appreciative of the rest of my advisory committee for their
support in their areas of expertise: Sandra Davis, Nancy Maloy, and Sherri
Zimmerman— thank you all.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................. iii LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................... ix LIST OF FIGURES ..........................................................................................................x ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................... xi CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................1 A. Background of the Study ........................................................3 1. Personality Trait Theory ...................................................3 2. Learning Style Theory ......................................................5 3. Distance Learning .............................................................7 B. Statement of the Problem........................................................8 C. Significance of the Study ........................................................9 D. Purpose and Scope of the Study............................................11 1. Purpose............................................................................12 2. Setting .............................................................................12 3. Participants......................................................................12 E. Variables ...............................................................................13 1. Independent Variables ....................................................13 2. Dependent Variable ........................................................13 F. Research Questions...............................................................13 G. Definitions of Terminology ..................................................14 H. Chapter Summary .................................................................15 CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ............................................16 A. Introduction...........................................................................16 B. Personality.............................................................................17 C. Personality Trait Theories and Models .................................18 1. Psychological Type Theory ............................................18 2. The Big Five ...................................................................20 3. Fulfillment Model ...........................................................23 4. Eysenck’s Theory............................................................24
vi
D. Instruments for Assessing Personality Type.........................25 1. NEO-PI ...........................................................................25 2. Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) .....................25 3. 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF)...................26 4. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) ............................27 5. Keirsey Temperament Sorter (KTS)...............................29 E. Research on Personality Type...............................................31 1. Personality Type and Performance .................................31 2. Personality Type, Performance, and Distance Education ........................................................................34 F. Learning Styles .....................................................................35 G. Learning Styles Theories and Models...................................37 1. Productivity Environmental Preference (PEP) ...............37 2. Mind Styles Delineator ...................................................39 3. Field Independence Versus Field Dependence ...............41 4. Grasha-Riechmann Learning Styles ...............................41 5. Experiential Learning Model ..........................................42 6. 4Mat System ...................................................................46 H. Instruments for Assessing Learning Styles...........................47 1. Learning Style Inventory (LSI).......................................49 2. Productivity Environmental Preference Survey (PEPS).............................................................................49 3. Mind Style Delineator.....................................................49 4. Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT)..........................50 I. Research on Learning Styles.................................................50 1. Learning Styles and Performance ...................................50 2. Learning Styles, Performance, and Distance Education ........................................................................52 3. Personality Trait and Learning Style ..............................53 J. Distance Education ...............................................................55 1. Trends in Distance Education .........................................55 2. Characteristics of Distance Learners ..............................56 K. Chapter Summary .................................................................58 CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY .....................................................................59 A. Introduction...........................................................................59 B. Research Design....................................................................59 1. Setting .............................................................................60 2. Distance Education Delivery ..........................................60 3. Course Information .........................................................61 4. Participants......................................................................62 C. Variables ...............................................................................63 1. Independent Variables ....................................................63 a. Learning Style...........................................................63 b. Personality Trait........................................................64
vii
2. Dependent Variable ........................................................65 D. Research Questions and Hypotheses ....................................66 E. Instrumentation .....................................................................67 1. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator..........................................68 2. Learning Style Inventory ................................................70 F. Procedure ..............................................................................71 G. Data Analysis ........................................................................73 H. Limitations ............................................................................75 I. Chapter Summary .................................................................75 CHAPTER IV. RESULTS ...................................................................................76 A. Introduction...........................................................................76 B. Participants............................................................................76 C. Summary of Data ..................................................................77 D. Data Analysis ........................................................................79 1. Introduction.....................................................................79 2. Statistical Method ...........................................................80 3. Assumptions....................................................................81 4. Personality Type on Student Performance: Research Question 1 .......................................................82 5. Learning Style on Student Performance: Research Question 2 .......................................................82 6. Personality Type and Learning Style on Student Performance: Research Question 3.................................82 7. Other Data Analysis........................................................83 E. Chapter Summary .................................................................83 CHAPTER V. DISCUSSION.............................................................................85 A. Introduction...........................................................................85 B. Study Summary.....................................................................85 C. Discussion of Results............................................................86 1. Research Question 1 .......................................................86 2. Research Question 2 .......................................................87 3. Research Question 3 .......................................................88 D. Recommendations for Practitioners......................................89 E. Recommendations for Further Research...............................91 F. Limitations of the Study........................................................92 G. Chapter Summary .................................................................94 REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................95 APPENDIXES ..............................................................................................................113 A. E-mail Granting Permission to Use the Learning Style Inventory Version 3 ...................................................114
viii
B. Letter Granting Permission to Use Pensacola Junior College Course in Study .....................................................116 C. The University of West Florida Institutional Review Board Approval Letter ........................................................118 D. Documents sent to Facilitating Professor to Recruit Participants..........................................................................121
ix
LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Personality Characteristics of Jung’s Psychological Type Theory..................21 2. Type Designations of the Big Five ..................................................................22 3. Comparison Characteristics of Jung’s Psychological Type Theory and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ..............................................................28 4. Personality Type Breakdown of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.................30 5. Productivity Environmental Preference Classification Model of Learning Styles ................................................................................................38 6. Characteristics of Learning Patterns for the Mind Styles Delineator ..............40 7. Classifications of the Grasha-Riechmann Student Learning Styles ................43 8. 4Mat: Characteristics of the Four Learning Styles ..........................................48 9. Sample Size Breakdown for Each Independent Variable ................................77 10. Descriptive Statistics for Personality Types, Learning Styles, and End- of-Semester Grades..........................................................................................78 11. Correlations Between Personality Type, Learning Style, and Semester Grade (n = 34)..................................................................................................80
x
LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Kolb’s model of learning styles .......................................................................44 2. 4Mat model of learning styles..........................................................................47
xi
ABSTRACT
PERSONALITY TYPES AND LEARNING STYLES: AN INVESTIGATION OF THEIR INFLUENCE ON PERFORMANCE IN A DISTANCE EDUCATION
ENVIRONMENT
Stacey Lynn Rimmerman
The researcher investigated whether personality type and learning style predicted
performance in distance education. Thirty-four participants from 3 sections of Art
Humanities completed online the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and the Learning Styles
Inventory. Using regression analysis, it was determined that neither personality type nor
learning style had a statistically significant effect on student performance in this setting.
However, the data did reveal some apparent self-selection of the learning environment.
Sensors outrepresented Intuitives by a large scale, identifying further areas for research.
A binomial test was used to prove these results were not random.
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Educators are concerned with methodologies that increase student performance
(Ackerman, Bowen, Beier, & Kanfer, 2001). Recognizing that students are different and
that teachers need to respond to those differences is not a new concept in education
(Peyton, 2003). The introduction of multiple learning environments opens questions
about effective course design based on students’ individual differences. Given the
financial benefits and possibility of enrollment increases, it is not surprising that colleges
and universities are offering more courses utilizing distance education formats (U.S.
Department of Education, 2002). Many facilities and institutions agree that their
campuses are not large enough to accommodate this increasing number of college-age
students (Oblinger, Barone, & Hawkins, 2001). Distance education programs may be one
solution to the capacity pressures that increasing registration may have on higher
education. It seems important in the design of new forms of distance education that
concern be placed on characteristics that may enhance performance. According to Barkhi
and Brozovsky (2004), individual differences can play a role in explaining variances in
performance in face-to-face and distance education settings.
Throughout the research it has become clear to practitioners that there is not a
particular instructional strategy that will benefit all students in all learning situations
2
(Dyrud, 1997; Orr, Park, Thompson, & Thompson, 1999; Terry, 2001). With this in
mind, focus needs to be placed on creating learning environments that meet specific
learners’ characteristics creating, in turn, learning situations in which students could
choose an environment based on their individual needs. Practitioners need to find
ways of reaching students with a variety of different learning styles and personality types,
in a variety of different environments, in order to find ways of enabling all learners to
become successful.
Chamberlin (2001) suggests that by taking advantage of the academic strengths of
online teaching environments, faculty can offer students the greatest chance to discover
their strengths and weaknesses as learners and the best opportunity to find their path to
achieving success. Whatever instructional process is selected, individual needs and
learning styles need to be considered when decisions are made about individualizing
In addition to these dominant functions, Jung (1933) proposed auxiliary functions.
The auxiliary for a psychologically healthy individual was a perceiving function if the
dominant was a judging function and a judging function if the dominant was a perceiving
function. Extraverts would rely on the auxiliary for introverting and introverts would rely
on it for extraverting (Maddi, 1989; Myers & McCaulley, 1989).
Jung believed that the attitudes and functions combine to affect how individuals
relate to the world and the people around them (Maddi, 1989; Myers, 1980). These
cognitive styles are typically bipolar and value free (Myers & McCaulley, 1989). Each
style dimension has different implications, none of which are any more or less optimal
than the other (Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer, 1998).
The Big Five
The Big Five is a five dimensional model of personality based on experience as
opposed to theory. “The model was identified by searching for the smallest number of
synonym clusters that could account for the largest variation in individual differences in
personality” (Center for Applied Cognitive Studies, 2004, ¶ 2). These factors are
dimensions, not types, so their measurement is changed regularly. They are also partly
genetic and universal (McCrae & Costa, 1997). The five factors as defined by The Center
for Applied Cognitive Studies are listed in Table 2.
Table 1 Personality Characteristics of Jung’s Psychological Type Theory
Dominant temperaments Descriptions
Extraverted sensor Realists, sensualists, people who are attracted by the physical characteristics of objects and people. Not reflective, strive for intensity of experience, consciousness is directed outward.
Introverted sensor Perception is very subjective, may seem indifferent to objective reality. Perceives the world as amusing and reacts subjectively to events in a way that is unrelated to objective criteria.
Extraverted intuitive Attempts to see all of the possibilities in a situation. Constantly needs new experiences in order to maintain interest. Highly enthusiastic and inspiring to others.
Introverted intuitive Inwardly directed with visionary ideals. Aloof, with little interest in explaining their vision. Life becomes a mission, often misunderstood.
Extraverted thinker Links ideas together in rational and logical ways. Conclusions drawn are directed outward. Thinking is a private, subjective experience. Expect others to recognize and obey a universal moral code.
Introverted thinker Contemplative and directed inward to subjective ideas. Elaborates all the ramifications and implications of an idea. Complex thinking, impractical and indifferent to objective concerns.
Extraverted feeler Conforming, adjusting response to objective circumstances. Strive for harmony, convictions of the heart take precedence over the head.
Introverted feeler Strives for inner intensity that is unrelated to external objects. Seemingly negative or indifferent, the focus is on inner processes. Inconspicuous nature can be seen as neutral, cold or dismissive.
Note. Table adapted from Jungian Psychology: Jung’s Theory of Psychological Types (p. 28), by M. Daniels, 2003.
22
Table 2 Type Designations of the Big Five
Designation Definition Associated facets
N Need for stability, negative emotionality or neuroticism
Sensitiveness, intensity, interpretation, and rebound time.
E Extraversion or surgency Enthusiasm, sociability, energy mode, taking charge, trust of others, and tact.
O Openness, culture, originality or intellect
Imagination, complexity, change, and scope.
A Agreeableness or accommodation
Service, agreement, deference, reserve, and reticence.
C Conscientiousness, consolidation or will to achieve
Perfectionism, organization, drive, concentration, and methodicalness.
Note. From What are the Big Five? (¶ 1), by Center for Applied Cognitive Studies, 2004. Links exists between The Big Five, Carl Jung's theory of psychological types, and
Myers-Briggs additions to Jung's original theory. Although The Big Five is based on
experience and not theory, developers were “closely attuned to human experience when
defining their four dimensional model” (Center for Applied Cognitive Studies, 2004, p.
8). For example, two of the five factors are precisely related to social contexts,
specifically extraversion. The judgment dimension is linked to accommodation (A) and
the dimension of introversion can be correlated to originality and openness (O) in The
Big Five.
23
Fulfillment Model
Alfred Adler's fulfillment model represents “interrelated peripheral characteristics
that find regular expression in people and that determine individuality” (Maddi, 1989, p.
320). In other words, Adler's theory was predicated on peripheral characteristics, rather
than dominant ones, making up an individual type. The basis of the theory stems largely
in part from a person's
Sense of inferiority and their means of circumventing or transcending it;
expressive of the core tendency of striving for superiority. Additionally, an
individual's style of life will evolve from the content of real and imagined
inferiorities and from the manner in which they are transcended or circumvented.
(Maddi, 1989, p. 321)
Adler postulated that the individuals' style of life is established by the age of 5 and that
there is no change thereafter (Adler, 1964).
Adler (1956) clearly designates the relationship between peripheral and core
personality traits. Additionally, family constellations, defined as a person's status with
regard to their siblings, is another important part the model (Adler). Basically, in
overcoming inferiority and striving to reach superiority within a family grouping, two
distinctions have come to formulate Adlerian typology: (a) constructiveness-
destructiveness and (b) activeness-passiveness. According to Adler (1964), the
constructive-destructive classification refers to individual social interest, while the active-
passive classification concerns itself more with the individualistic implications of striving
for perfection.
24
Drawn from the above distinctions, four types of peripheral personality styles are
suggested: (a) active-constructive, (b) passive-constructive, (c) active-destructive, and (d)
passive-destructive (Adler, 1956). These styles are established in childhood and are
believed to remain static. Unlike Jung’s theory of typology, “Adler considers the
constructive-deconstructive dimension somewhat more important than activeness-
passiveness in determining what is ideal” (Maddi, 1989, p. 323).
Eysenck's Theory
“Hans Eysenck believed that heredity played a large role in determining
personality. His theory is based on physiology and genetics, although he was a
behaviorist who considered learned habits of great importance” (Brand, 1997, p. 80).
Eysenck (1981) believed that personality differences were hereditary. His theory was
heavily influenced by Carl Jung and he favored the temperament side of typology
(Ackerman et al., 2001; Maddi, 1989).
Eysenck's (1981) original research discovered two dominant dimensions of
temperament: (a) neuroticism-stability and (b) extraversion-introversion. “Neuroticism-
stability described a range from calm and collected to people that have a tendency to be
nervous” (Brand, 1997, p. 80). He believed this was a “genetically-based,
physiologically-supported dimension of personality” (Guilford, 1967, p. 102).
Extraversion-introversion is described in Jungian terms as an internal versus external
reflection of the world in which we feel most comfortable (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985).
The two dimensions of neuroticism-stability and introversion-extraversion are not
interrelated and form two quadratic axes. The neurotic extravert, neurotic introvert, stable
25
extravert, and stable introvert generally combine in most people (Guilford, 1967). The
majority of people are closer to the center of the model and are called ambiverts (Eysenck
& Eysenck, 1985).
Instruments for Assessing Personality Type
Personality trait theory is determined by the instruments intended to measure the
presented dimensions of personality. In other words, personality type instruments
measure matching personality type theories. There are numerous instruments that
measure personality type, including the (a) NEO-PI, Eysenck Personality Questionnaire
(EPQ), (b) the 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF), (c) the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator (MBTI), and (d) the Keirsey Temperament Sorter (KTS).
NEO-PI
The NEO-PI is derived from The Big Five and contains 23 personality scores in
five dimensions: (a) neuroticism, (b) extroversion, (c) openness, (d) agreeableness, and
(e) conscientiousness (Grabowski & Jonassen, 1993). The dimension of extraversion also
contains the subscales of (a) warmth, (b) gregariousness, (c) assertiveness, (d) activity,
(e) excitement seeking, and (f) positive emotions. The NEO-PI is a self-report
questionnaire that can be taken in paper form or online.
Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ)
Eysenck (1981) originally developed the Maudsley Medical Questionnaire, which
measured neuroticism (N) solely. He subsequently published the Personality Inventory
26
(MPI), which added an extraversion scale to his earlier version. Further research showed
Eysenck that the inventory needed improvement. This led to the development of The
Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI), which added a lie scale to the form (Eysenck &
Eysenck, 1985). The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) added the fourth
dimension of psychoticism (P). The EPQ is a personality questionnaire devised to
measure not only introversion-extroversion but also neuroticism. The EPQ divides the
dimensions of extraversion-introversion and neuroticism-stability into four defined
quadrants:
1. Stable extraverts—sanguine qualities such as outgoing, talkative, responsive,
easygoing, lively, carefree, and leadership.
2. Unstable extraverts—choleric qualities such as touchy, restless, excitable,
changeable, impulsive, and irresponsible.
3. Stable introverts—phlegmatic qualities such as calm, even-tempered, reliable,
controlled, peaceful, thoughtful, careful, and passive.
4. Unstable introverts—melancholic qualities such as quiet, reserved,
feeling extravert (Fe), feeling introvert (Fi)” (Myers, 1962, p. 5). Correlation data exist
between the MBTI and Jung's psychological types (see Table 3).
Table 3 Comparison Characteristics of Jung’s Psychological Type Theory and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
Introverts Extraverts
MBTI type Jung type MBTI type Jung type
ISTJ IS(T) ESTP ES(T)
ISTP IT(S) ESTJ ET(S)
ISFJ IS(F) ESFP ES(F)
ISFP IF(S) ESFJ EF(S)
INFJ IN(F) ENFP EN(F)
INFP IF(N) ENFJ EF(N)
INTJ IN(T) ENTP EN(T)
INTP IT(N) ENTJ ET(N)
Note. Table adapted from Jungian Psychology: Jung’s Theory of Psychological Types (p. 6), by M. Daniels, 2003. In addition to Jung's 16 preference types, Myers and Briggs added action and
reflection (judging and perceiving) functions to the theory (Myers, 1962). The following
describes each of the Myers-Briggs polarities:
1. Extraversion versus introversion (how a person becomes energized).
2. Sensing versus intuition (how a person perceives information).
29
3. Thinking versus feeling (how a person makes decisions).
4. Judging versus perceiving (what type of lifestyle a person adopts).
A preference for one function on each polarity results in 16 different types as listed in
Table 4 (Myers et al., 1998).
The MBTI is a “forced-choice, self-report instrument, designed for administration
by qualified professionals and intended for use with normal subjects” (Thompson &
Borrello, 1986, p. 748). It is currently the most frequently used psychometric instrument
in the study of education, training, and management (Capraro & Capraro, 2002; Sabatier
& Oppenheim, 2001).
Keirsey Temperament Sorter (KTS)
Using Jungian theory, Keirsey and Bates (1984) developed an indicator that
describes the four temperaments based on combinations of two of the four Myers-Briggs
dimensions. The KTS identifies how each of the initial temperaments is either concrete or
abstract in thought and speech, and either cooperative or pragmatic in getting what they
want (Keirsey, 1998). He then divides each temperament into two distinct subtypes,
depending on their inclination to be directive or informative in dealing with others.
Like Jung, and Myers and Briggs, Keirsey (1998) theorizes that the four
temperaments are unique consistent patterns of personality which are fundamentally
different from one another. Using the bipolar scales from the MBTI, Keirsey organizes
the temperaments accordingly. The same 16 temperaments exist in the KTS as in the
MBTI; however, the definitions vary slightly and the terminology of the temperaments
has been altered.
Table 4 Personality Type Breakdown of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
ISTJ Serious, quiet, logical, dependable, well organized.
ISFJ Quiet, friendly, responsible, conscientious, accurate with figures, patient with detail.
INFJ Gifted and original, desire to please, quiet, conscientious, considerate of others.
INTJ Original, large amount of drive, organized, skeptical, critical and independent.
ISTP Quiet, reserved, analytical, exerts himself only as much as he considers necessary.
ISFP Retiring, quietly friendly, sensitive, hates arguments, modest, loyal, lives in the present moment.
INFP Enthusiastic, interested and responsive. Friendly, warm but not sociable for the sake of sociability.
INTP Quiet, reserved, good at theoretical or scientific subjects. Logical, has no capacity for small talk.
ESTP Matter of fact, doesn't worry or hurry, always has a good time. Blunt and sometimes insensitive.
ESFP Outgoing, easygoing, uncritical, fond of a good time, joins in helpfully, literal minded, tries to remember rather than to reason.
ENFP Warmly enthusiastic, high-spirited, ingenious, imaginative, can do almost anything that interests him, often relies on spur of the moment ability.
ENTP Quick, ingenious, gifted in many lines, lively and stimulating. Alert and outspoken, argues for fun on either side of any question. Resourceful in solving problems.
ESTJ Practical, realistic, matter of fact, with a natural head for business. Not interested in subjects he sees no actual use for. Good at organizing.
ESFJ Warm-hearted, talkative, popular, conscientious, interested in everyone. Cooperative, no capacity for abstract thinking, always doing something nice for everyone.
ENFJ Responsive, responsible, feels a real concern for what others think and want, tries to handle things with due regard for other people's feelings and desires. Sociable and popular.
ENTJ Hearty, frank, good at things that require reasoning and intelligent talk, like debate or public speaking. Well-informed and self-confident.
Note. Adapted from The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Manual (p. 64) by I. B. Myers, 1962, Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
31
The Keirsey and Bates (1984) instrument defines the temperaments as (a)
Dionysian (sensing and perceiving preferences), (b) Epimethean (sensing and judging
preferences), (c) Promethean (intuitive and thinking preferences), and (d) Apollonian
(intuitive and feeling preferences (Borg & Shapiro, 1996). These four dimensions are
further classified in terms of two subtypes, depending on their inclination to be directive
or informative in dealing with others.
Research on Personality Type
The establishment of personality type theory has appeared in psychological and
educational literature for approximately 40 years (Lounsbury et al., 2003). However,
there is little agreement as to the effects personality traits may have on instructional
practices and learning.
Personality Type and Performance
Research studies show mixed results of the significance of personality type in
relation to individual performance. Lengnick-Hall and Sanders (1997) conducted
numerous studies matching personality type to performance with significant correlations.
Westerman et al. (2002) expanded Lengnick-Hall and Sanders’ research by examining
relationships between personality type, learning environment, and performance. They
found that personality remained a significant predictor of student performance,
specifically related to the dimension of introversion (Westerman et al.). However, neither
of these studies measured personality using the MBTI nor were the performance
outcomes specifically described.
32
Other studies endorse the belief that personality type influences performance.
Wheeler (2001) conducted a literature review of 16 articles specifically related to
accounting courses. All of the studies examined used the MBTI to measure personality
and seven of the studies assessed performance with course grade. There was a significant
interrelation between personality type and performance in all seven studies. The most
significant correlations were on the sensing-intuitive scale. These results seem to indicate
that there are dimensions of personality type that may be important in the
individualization of course design.
According to Felder, Felder, and Dietz (2002),
Studies of type effects in engineering education have been carried out by a
consortium of eight universities and the Center for Applications of Psychological
Type. In all of these studies, introverts, intuitors, thinkers, and judgers generally
outperformed their extraverted, sensing, feeling and perceiving counterparts.
(p. 3)
It is unclear how measures of performance were determined; however, these results
certainly support the idea that personality type may influence performance.
Performance variables such as cumulative grade point averages over the course of
years have been studied in relation to personality type. Rosati (1999) observed type
differences for students at the lower end of the academic range with no distinction by
type for the higher level students (as cited in Felder et al., 2002). Felder et al. showed
similar findings studying admissions indices and grade point averages of freshman
engineering students. Among the stronger students, introverts had higher grade point
33
averages and a higher admissions index; however, the differences were not statistically
significant.
Studies examining personality types as predictors of performance have also been
conducted on the general college population. Kahn, Nauta, Gailbreath, Tipps, and
Chartrand (2002) conducted a study using 677 college freshman enrolled in orientation
courses. Using the MBTI and several other personality assessment instruments, their
findings uniquely predicted grade point average and freshman-to-sophomore persistence.
Reviewing studies of type effects in education, McCaulley (1990) reports the
sensing-intuition difference to be the most important preference. Myers et al. (1998)
report that preference for intuition, which involves perceiving patterns and connections in
information, is related to higher scores on standardized tests than the preference for
sensing, which implies a focus on details. Rosati (1999) and Felder et al. (2002) support
Myers and McCaulley in their findings that intuitors consistently outperformed sensors in
college engineering courses, thus confirming the possibility that personality type and
performance may be of particular interest in course design and instruction.
Results of these studies suggest that personality type may influence performance.
Most of these studies examined performance through matching preferences with varying
assessment criteria. In many cases, correlations were made; however, specific outcomes
were not discussed. For this study, performance will be measured by averaging four
exams throughout a 16-week semester. The idea of personality type influencing
performance further implies that individuals displaying specific personality types may be
better able to learn effectively through different learning environments, such as distance
education.
34
Personality Type, Performance, and Distance Education
The ability to organize thoughts and manage time contributes to each individual's
measure of success in educational settings (Atman, 1988). The lack of face-to-face
interaction in distance education implies that certain characteristics be present in the
individuals who choose this environment. The following explanation from Myers and
McCaulley (1985) provides further interpretation for the consideration of the application
of psychological type elements in academic settings.
Academic achievement requires the capacity to deal intensively with concepts and
ideas, which are mainly the province of introversion. It also requires the capacity
to work with abstraction, symbols, and theory, which are the province of intuition.
. . . Type theory predicts . . . that types with introversion and intuition (IN types)
will have a relative advantage, since their interests match academic tasks.
Academic tasks requiring logical analysis favor thinking types, and academic
tasks requiring understanding of human motivations favor feeling types. The
perceptive attitude (open, spontaneous, and curious) favors a wide acquaintance
with many subjects, which may lead to increased scores on aptitude measures.
The judging attitude (planful, focused and organized) is related to application and
is often associated with higher grades. (p. 96)
Distance education environments require a tremendous amount of planning,
organizing, and time management on the part of the learner. Eyong and Schniederjans
(2004) found personality type to be a significant predictor of grade achievement in a
totally Web-based education course. Their findings indicated that because of the
35
independent nature of distance education, introverts and individuals with preferences for
paying attention to detail outperformed their counterparts.
In a similar study, Montgomery (n.d.) found that students who performed best in a
variety of multimedia-based distance education settings were active learners, sensors, and
judgers, or those who prefer global thinking. Her findings also correlated visual learners
in this environment as outperforming their verbal classmates.
When faculty move their classes online, the assumption (Patterson, n.d.) is that
the students are the same as face-to-face students. What works in a face-to-face
environment does not necessarily work in a distance education setting (Diaz & Cartnal,
1999). According to Diaz and Cartnal, online students differ considerably in cognitive
styles from their face-to-face counterparts.
With increasingly refined technology available, the implications for uniquely
designed distance education programs continually grow. It would be possible to develop
individualized curricula and course design focused on information management, self-
monitoring techniques, and time-use control skills that address the specific needs of
distance learners.
Learning Styles
Quite a few definitions of learning styles have emerged from the review of
literature. Terry (2001) reviewed a variety of interpretations and revealed learning styles
definitions based on “self-views, needs, personalities, individual strategies, differences,
Psychological Analytic and global, cerebral preference, reflective and impulsive Note. Table adapted from Dunn, 1986 and Dunn, Dunn, & Price, 1979 (as cited in Learning Styles and Adult Intellectual Development: An Investigation of Their Influence on Learning in a Hypertext Environment, by K. Rasmussen, 1996, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of South Alabama, Mobile).
Environmental aspects are defined as “reactions to the immediate instructional
environment” (Dunn & Griggs, 2000, p. 9). This category identifies reactions to sound,
lighting, temperature, and seating arrangement. Emotional aspects are defined as an
individual's own emotionality and include areas of (a) motivation, (b) persistence, (c)
responsibility, and (d) preferences for the amount of structure required. Sociological
39
aspects are defined as social attitudes of the learning environment and include
preferences for (a) working alone or with peers, (b) group or individualized instruction,
and (c) routines in the methods of learning or variety. Physical attributes of learning
include (a) perceptual strengths, (b) time-of-day energy levels, (c) intake (snacking while
concentrating), and (d) mobility needs. Psychological elements of learning include global
versus analytic processing determined by correlations among (a) sound, (b) light, (c)
According to Dunn (1996), in order for students to be successful in a variety of
educational situations, individual learning styles should be considered. Many
practitioners have studied the impact of learning styles on achievement and have found
that matching individual styles to environment or instruction significantly contributes
to performance (Dunn et al., 1990; Dunn & Griggs, 2000; McCaulley, 1990; Terry,
2001).
Mind Styles Delineator
Gregorc (1985) proposed a four-quadrant model of learning styles, the Mind
Styles Delineator, which describes learning within the polarities of perception and order
(DePorter, 2000). Using the dimension of perception, Gregorc postulated that individuals
process information in either an abstract or concrete manner. Similarly, the dimension of
order refers to the ways in which individuals prioritize or use incoming information either
sequentially or randomly (DePorter; Gregorc). The four scales are (a) abstract thinking,
(b) concrete thinking, (c) sequential thinking, and (d) random thinking.
40
Abstract thinking describes individuals who prefer to work with concepts and
ideas. Concrete thinking refers to more detail-oriented thought processes. Sequential
thinking describes orderly, step-by-step thinking, and random thinking refers to the
process of skipping from one idea to another without order (DePorter, 2000).
Combinations of the two scales generate four possible types. Although individuals tend to
be dominant in one or two dimensions, most people use all of the styles in different times
and contexts (Rasmussen, 1996). The elements associated with each learning pattern are
described in Table 6.
Table 6 Characteristics of Learning Patterns for the Mind Styles Delineator Style Characteristics Concrete sequential (CS)
Order and logical sequencing of information, process information step-by-step, prefer following directions, physical concrete interaction with the world.
Abstract sequential (AS) Translate and interpret what they learn with what they know, good at research, inquisitive and curious, want to understand theories, prefer learning information that is logical and sequential.
Abstract random (AR) Global thinkers, need time to reflect before making decisions, prefer big picture, people oriented, creative.
Concrete random (CR) Divergent thinkers, enjoy experimentation, creative, lose track of time and deadlines, look for options and possibilities, intuitive and insightful.
Note. Table adapted from Discovering Your Personal Learning Style, by B. DePorter, 2000, Oceanside, CA: Learning Forum and from Learning Styles and Adult Intellectual Development: An Investigation of Their Influence on Learning in a Hypertext Environment, by K. Rasmussen, 1996, Mobile: University of South Alabama.
41
Field Independence Versus Field Dependence
The dimension of field independence versus field dependence measures whether
the learner uses an “analytical as opposed to a global way of experiencing the [subject
matter] environment” (Keefe, 1979, p. 9). Both field independent and dependent
dimensions rely on an individual’s method of perceiving his learning field or
environment. Field dependent modes of perceiving refer to an individual’s “perception
being dominated by the overall organization of the surrounding field, and parts of the
field are experienced as fused. In a field independent mode of perceiving, parts of the
field are experienced as discrete from the organized ground” (Sims & Sims, 1995, p. 51).
In other words, field dependent individuals rely on their environment for structure
and they rely heavily on external stimuli. They are social learners with short attention
spans who like informal learning situations (Sims & Sims, 1995). Field independent
learners are analytical and do not rely on their learning environment for stimuli. These
learners are self-motivated, task-oriented and internally structured (Grabowski &
Jonassen, 1993).
Grasha-Riechmann Learning Styles
Riechmann and Grasha examined the learning styles of college students through a
social, affective perspective (Solihull Secondary SCITT, 2002). The theory refers to the
different ways individuals approach the learning environment as opposed to an
individual's perception of learning itself (Keefe, 1979). “This measure can be classified
as a social interaction scale because it deals with patterns of preferred styles for
42
interacting with teachers and fellow students in a learning environment rather than how
information is perceived or organized” (Grabowski & Jonassen, 1993, p. 281).
Riechmann and Grasha (1974) identified the following bipolar scales: (a)
avoidant-participant, (b) competitive-collaborative, and (c) dependent-independent. The
avoidant-participant scale measures how much learners want to be involved in the
learning environment. This includes attitudes toward learning and reactions to the
classroom environment. The competitive-collaborative scale measures learner
motivations in relationships with other students, including the nature of the interaction.
The independent-dependent scale measures how much structure the learner desires and
his attitude toward teachers. The individual dimensions are described in Table 7.
The Grasha-Riechmann learning styles are closely linked to other cognitive styles
and controls such as locus of control and Kolb’s learning styles (Grabowski & Jonassen,
1993). Locus of control is a measure of one’s feelings regarding individual internal
versus external responsibility for events. Kolb’s learning styles are a measure of a
person’s preferred style of perceiving and processing information and are defined
thoroughly later in this chapter. Although the model indicates bipolar dimensions,
Riechmann and Grasha (as cited in Solihull Secondary SCITT, 2002) found that most
learners indicate some degree of preference in each of the categories.
Experiential Learning Model
Kolb's (1981a) experiential learning styles model has roots stemming from
multiple theories. Among them, Kolb has drawn conclusions from John Dewey's
emphasis on the need for learning to be grounded in experience, Kurt Lewin's emphasis
43
Table 7 Classifications of the Grasha-Riechmann Student Learning Styles
Learning style Definition Participant
Desire to learn course content, responsible for own learning, participates with others, is independent and collaborative.
Avoidant No desire to learn course content, assumes no responsibility, does not participate with others, is dependent and is competitive.
Collaborative Work well with other students, enjoy group or team activities.
Competitive See the classroom as a win-lose situation in which they need to win. Do not work well with other students.
Independent Confident and curious learners. Prefer to work alone. Enjoy self-paced work and independent study.
Dependent Need to be told what to do. The teacher is the source of all information. Will learn only what is required. Need quite a bit of guidance.
Note. Table adapted from Handbook of Individual Differences, Learning, and Instruction (p. 250) by B. L. Grabowski and D. H. Jonassen, 1993, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
on the importance of a person being active in learning, and Jean Piaget's theory on
intelligence as the result of the interaction of the person and the environment (Grabowski
& Jonassen, 1993). Kolb's cognitive theory is based on four classifications that illustrate
competencies learners need in order to learn effectively.
The classifications are (a) concrete experience (CE), (b) reflective observation
(RO), (c) abstract conceptualization (AC), and (d) active experimentation (AE). These
modes are situated at the ends of two intersecting continua according to learners'
corresponding preferences for feeling versus thinking (CE versus AC) and watching
44
versus doing (RO versus AE). This intersection forms a matrix with four quadrants into
which individual preferences fall. The four learning styles are (a) diverger (CE and RO),
(b) assimilator (RO and AC), (c) converger (AC and AE), and (d) accommodator and are
displayed in Figure 1 (AE and CE).
Figure 1. Kolb’s model of learning styles. From Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences (pp. 31-57) by D. A. Kolb, 1981b, London: Wiley & Sons.
General descriptions of learner characteristics are from Kolb (1976, 1981b, 1984),
Rasmussen (1996), and Terry (2001). These style delineations are provided below:
45
1. Accommodators learn best through hands-on experience. They like to carry
out plans and take risks. Accommodators enjoy solving problems through trial
and error. They are adaptable, concrete, and active.
2. Divergers enjoy brainstorming, imagination, and emotionality. They are
interested in cultural activities and are multiperspective when problem
solving. Divergers have strengths in concrete and reflective thinking.
3. Assimilators are more concerned with theories and less with people. They are
thinkers and watchers and like to put things in concise, logical formats.
Assimilators rely on inductive reasoning and have dominant preferences in
abstract conceptualization and reflective observation.
4. Convergers choose to deal with things rather than people and prefer technical
tasks and practical solutions. They are thinkers and doers and are best at
finding practical uses for ideas and theories. Convergers use deductive
reasoning and learn best abstractly and actively.
Henson and Hwang (2002) note that the theory is cyclical in nature and that “an
effective learner typically participates in new experiences (CE) and then reflects on these
experiences (RO) to develop informal theories (AC). The learner then uses these theories
to make decisions or solve problems (AE)” (p. 713). Further delineation of the model is
depicted in the competition amongst the abilities of process and perception. According to
Kolb, Boyatzis, and Mainemelis (2001), the abilities within the dimensions of process
and perception represent polarized aptitudes that lie on different ends of the continuum.
Although effective learners utilize all four abilities, the average learner favors one ability
on each dimension. It is the combination of learners’ abilities on abstractness over
46
concreteness (AC-CE) and action over reflection (AE-RO) that constitutes ones learning
style preference.
4Mat System
Based on Kolb's learning types and Jung's concepts of psychological type,
McCarthy (1981) added recommended teaching methods based on sequential processes
and developed the 4Mat system. Beginning with the diverger and successively continuing
through the assimilator, converger, and accommodator, she found a way to include all
learners in their natural preferences while encouraging them to develop skills in the other
three styles. Figure 2 summarizes these sequential processes.
The model requires each lesson or content chunk to be directed around the circle
answering questions relevant to each of Kolb's quadrants: “Why? (relevance), what?
(facts and descriptive material), how? (methods and procedures) and what if?
(exceptions, applications, creative combination with other material” (Cooper, L. W.,
2001, p. 17). She also included brain dominance from other researchers (McCarthy,
1981). The 4Mat model specifically “reflects brain research indicating that the focus of
traditional teaching is too narrow and may put students at risk for not working up to their
potential” (Kise, 2004, p. 67).
Unlike other cognitive learning models, McCarthy (1981) places her focus on
creating learning environments that utilize all of the learning styles. In an effort to
support the dominant and nondominant styles of all students, McCarthy has created
strategies to assist educators and designers through the use of methods that promote the
Figure 2. 4Mat model of learning styles. Adapted from The 4Mat System: Teaching to Learning Styles With Right/Left Mode Techniques (p. 122), by B. McCarthy, 1981, Barrington, IL: Excel.
use of specific learning styles. In Table 8, McCarthy summarizes characteristics of
Additionally, styles are often defined by the instruments designed to measure them
48
(Rasmussen, 1996). There are several instruments currently available to measure learning
styles. These instruments include the (a) Learning Style Inventory (LST), (b) Productivity
Environmental Preference Survey (PERS), (c) Mind Style Delineator and (d) Group
Embedded Figures Test (GEFT).
Table 8 4Mat: Characteristics of the Four Learning Styles Learning styles
Learner characteristics
Instructional design and teacher characteristics
Diverger Concrete perception of information, process reflectively, interest in people and culture, commitment, meaning and clarity are high priorities.
Aid in self-awareness, encourage discussions, team work, explicit meaningful goals.
Assimilator Abstract perception of information, process reflectively, detail oriented, seek continuity, expert opinions are of great importance.
Transmit knowledge, facts and details, organized sequential thinking, demonstrations of knowledge.
Converger Abstract perception of information, process actively, pragmatic, strategic thinkers, skill oriented, like to experiment.
Encourage productivity and competence, skills for adult life are important, increase independence with knowledge level.
Accommodator Concrete perception of information, process actively, learn by doing, interested in self-discovery, enthusiastic, flexible, risk takers, people are important.
Enable self-discovery, gear curricula to leaner interests, encourage experiential learning, help students act on their own visions.
Note. Table adapted from The 4Mat System: Teaching to Learning Styles With Right/Left Mode Techniques (pp. 37-43), by B. McCarthy, 1981, Barrington, IL: Excel.
49
Learning Style Inventory (LSI)
The LSI is a self-reporting instrument consisting of 12 sets of sentence
completions. Each sentence has four possible endings that individuals rank in order of
how they learn best. Once the dimensional scores are calculated, results are shown on the
active-refIective and abstract-concrete continua. In addition to the paper format, the LSI
has been placed online where it can be computer scored for more accurate results. The
instrument was specifically designed for adults to help them understand their strengths
and weaknesses in terms of learning (Rasmussen, 1996).
Peyton, T. (2003). Motivation and self-regulation of learning strategies on student
performance in online courses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University
of West Florida, Pensacola.
Plesa, Z. (2003). The Terranova Mathematics Test as a predictor for grades in Algebra I.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of West Florida, Pensacola.
Porter, L. R. (1997). Creating the virtual classroom: Distance learning with the Internet.
New York: Wiley.
Rasmussen, K. (1996). Learning styles and adult intellectual development: An
investigation of their influence on learning in a hypertext environment.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of South Alabama, Mobile.
Riechmann, S. W., & Grasha, A. F. (1974). A rational approach to developing and
assessing the construct validity of a student learning style scales instrument.
Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary & Applied, 87, 213-223.
109
Roblyer, M. D. (1999). Is choice important in distance learning? A study of student
motives for taking Internet-based courses at the high school and community
college levels. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(1), 157-172.
Rosati, P. (1999). Student retention from first-year engineering related to personality
type. Journal of Psychological Type, 41, 33-37.
Ross, J. L., Drysdale, T. B., & Schulz, R. A. (2001). Cognitive learning styles and
academic performance in two postsecondary computer application courses.
Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33, 400-413.
Sabatier, S., & Oppenheim, C. (2001). The ILS professional in the city of London:
Personality and glass ceiling issues. Journal of Librarianship and Information
Science, 33(3), 145-156.
Sabry, K., & Baldwin, L. (2003). Web-based learning interaction and learning styles.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 34, 443-454.
Schwarz, N. (1999). Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers. American
Psychologist, 54, 93-105.
Shepard, P. (1985). Tools for transformation: Tools for personal growth and
transformation of body, mind, and spirit: The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire
(EPQ). Retrieved February 19, 2005, from www.trans4mind.com/personality/
EPQ.html
Sims, R. R., & Sims, S. J. (1995). The importance of learning styles: Understanding the
implications for learning, course design, and education. Westport, CT:
Greenwood.
110
Slaats, A., Van der Sanden, J., & Lodewijks, J. (1997, March 8-13). Relating personality
characteristics and learning style factors to grades in vocational education. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, Chicago.
Smith, K. L. (1997). Preparing faculty for instructional technology: From education
to development to creative independence. Cause/Effect, 20(3), 36-44.
Snow, R. E., Corno, L., & Jackson, D. (1996). Individual differences in affective and
cognitive functions. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of
educational psychology (pp. 243-310). New York: Macmillan.
Soliday, S. F., & Sanders, R. E. (1993). A comparison of personality types/learning styles
of secondary vocational and nonvocational students. Journal of Vocational
Education Research, 18(2), 69-86.
Solihull Secondary SCITT. (2002). Handbook of learning styles and strategies. Retrieved
January 2, 2005, from http://www.solwebs.net/Handbook/learning/
learningstyle.htm
Stokes, S. P. (2003, November 5-7). Temperament, learning styles, and demographic
predictors of college student satisfaction in a digital learning environment. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of Mid-South Educational Research Association,
Biloxi, MS.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
111
Terry, M. (2001). Translating learning style theory into university teaching practices: An
article based on Kolb's experiential learning model [Electronic version]. Journal
of College Reading and Learning, 32(1), 68-82.
Thompson, B., & Borrello, G. M. (1986). Construct validity of the Myers-Briggs type
indicator. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46, 745-752.
Truluck & Courtenay (1999). The learning style inventory: Convergent validity study in
an applied career setting. Retrieved December 15, 2004, from http://www
.psccfp.gc.ca/ppc/learning_style_inventory_e.htm
U.S. Department of Education. (2002). National Center for Education Statistics,
Postsecondary Education Quick Information System, Survey on Distance
Education at Higher Education Institutions. Retreived August 14, 2003, from
http://nces.edu.gov.surveys
Verma, B. P., & Sheikh, G. Q. (1996). Cognitive style, personality, and psychogenic
needs. Journal of Psychological Researches, 40(1), 62-68.
Vermetten, Y. J., Lodewijks, H. G., & Vermunt, J. D. (2001). The role of personality
traits and goal orientations in strategy use. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 26(2), 149-170.
Wang, A. Y., & Newlin, M. H. (2000). Characteristics of students who enroll and
succeed in psychology Web-based classes. Journal of Educational Psychology,
92(1), 137-143.
Wang, A. Y., & Newlin, M. H. (2002). Predictors of performance in the virtual
classroom: Identifying and helping at-risk cyber-students [Electronic version].
T.H.E. Journal, 29(10), 21-29.
112
Westerman, J. W., Nowicki, M. D., & Plante, D. (2002). Fit in the classroom: Predictors
of student performance and satisfaction in management education. Journal of
Management Education, 26(1), 5-18.
Wheeler, P. (2001). The Myers-Briggs type indicator and applications to accounting
education and research. Issues in Accounting Education, 16(1), 125-140.
Wolk, C., & Nikolai, L. A. (1997). Personality types of accounting students and faculty:
Comparisons and implications. Journal of Accounting Education, 15, 1-17.
113
APPENDIXES
114
Appendix A
E-mail Granting Permission to Use the Learning Style Inventory Version 3
115
116
Appendix B
Letter Granting Permission to Use Pensacola Junior College Course in Study
117
118
Appendix C
The University of West Florida Institutional Review Board Approval Letter
119
120
121
Appendix D
Documents Sent to Facilitating Professor to Recruit Participants
122
Introductory Letter and Invitation to Participate Hello everyone, My name is Stacey Rimmerman and I am an assistant professor here at Pensacola Junior College and a doctoral student at the University of West Florida. This spring I will be conducting research in your Humanities Art class for my dissertation. This research will be very helpful for educators and designers of distance education environments, similar to the one you are in right now. In my study, I am trying to find out if learning styles and learning preferences have anything to do with performance in online classes. For this research I am inviting you to participate by taking two inventories online during the duration of the course. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Learning Style Inventory (LSI) have been used widely and are both very beneficial to educators when planning curriculum and designing courses. Both of these instruments will help you to identify how you prefer to learn and how you prefer to process information. Neither of these instruments are used for psychiatric evaluations. These tests are used strictly to help individuals find out more about themselves and the people around them. Both instruments will be available online and each will take approximately 15-20 minutes. In addition, if you are interested in your results they will be available immediately online upon completion of the inventories. Your results will only be known to you and me, the researcher, and your name will not be used in the research. Instead you will be identified by the last four digits of your social security number. Additionally, Ms. Horigan has graciously offered extra credit to anyone who chooses to participate in the study. If you are interested in participating in this study, please read and sign the informed consent form that is attached to this letter. Ms. Horigan will place the website addresses on your WebCT course page later in January and instructions will be provided at that time. Thank you so much for your participation, I really appreciate it. Sincerely, Stacey Rimmerman
123
Informed Consent Form Title of Research: Personality Types and Learning Styles: An Investigation of their
Influence on Performance in a Distance Education Environment.
I. Federal and university regulations require us to obtain signed consent for participation in research involving human participants. After reading the attached letter and statements in section II and IV below, please indicate your consent by signing and dating this form.
II. Statement of Procedure: Thank you for your interest in this research project
being conducted by Stacey Rimmerman, an assistant professor at Pensacola Junior College and doctoral student at the University of West Florida. Hopefully, the introductory letter, enclosed with this consent form, explained the research project. This stage of the research involves my administering the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Learning Style Inventory (LSI) to you. This will be done online, through two websites that will be provided to you by the participating professor. The major aspects of the study are described in the statements below, including the risks and benefits of participating. Your information will be kept in the strict confidence with only you and the researcher having access to the results of the MBTI and the LSI instruments. Carefully read the information provided below. If you wish to participate in this study, type your name and the date and e-mail this form back to [email protected]. If you have questions or concerns regarding this project, please contact Stacey Rimmerman in the Visual Arts Department at Pensacola Junior College at (850) 484-1462 or by e-mail at [email protected].
I understand that:
1) I will be administered the commercially produced Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) online. Depending on the type of computer you are using the length of the inventory will be approximately 30 minutes. I will also be administered the commercially produced Learning Style Inventory (LSI) online. The length of inventory will be approximately 15 minutes, depending on your computer.
2) My end of the semester grade for Humanities Art (ARH 2000W) will be given to the researcher and compared to my MBTI and LSI results.
3) I will be given immediate results online from both the MBTI and the LSI as soon as I have completed the inventories. Explanations of the results will also be available online.
4) While data is being gathered, my name will be replaced by the last four numbers of my social security number. At no time will my name be referenced in the study results and/or reports.
5) My professor will be adding extra credit to my end of the term grade, for my participation in this study.
124
6) I may discontinue participation in this study at any time without penalties or repercussions.
III. Potential Risks of the Study:
1) There are no foreseeable risks involved with the study. IV. Potential Benefits of the Study:
1) Data obtained from this study may provide educational professionals information that would allow them to better facilitate learning experiences in future classes.
2) Information obtained from this study may provide the participants with valuable information about his/her learning style and preferred methods of processing information.
3) Participants may gain a greater respect for the personal learning styles and information processing preferences of their fellow students.
4) Comparison of data should give educators, designers and researcher additional information about the learning styles and type preferences as they relate to distance education courses.
Statement of Consent: I certify that I have read and fully understand the Statement of Procedure given above and agree to participate in the research project described therein. Permission is given voluntarily and without coercion or undo influence. It is understood that I may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of any benefits to which I may otherwise by entitled. I may print a copy of this consent form for my records. If you have any questions or concerns please call Stacey Rimmerman, the researcher, at (850) 484-1462. Please e-mail the signed consent form to: [email protected]. ___________________________________________ Participant’s Name (Please Print) ___________________________________________ __________________ Participant’s Signature Date
125
Introductory Letter and Invitation to Participate Hello everyone, My name is Stacey Rimmerman and I am an assistant professor here at Pensacola Junior College and a doctoral student at the University of West Florida. This spring I will be conducting research in your Humanities Art class for my dissertation. This research will be very helpful for educators and designers of distance education environments, similar to the one you are in right now. In my study, I am trying to find out if learning styles and learning preferences have anything to do with performance in online classes. For this research I am inviting you to participate by taking two inventories online during the duration of the course. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Learning Style Inventory (LSI) have been used widely and are both very beneficial to educators when planning curriculum and designing courses. Both of these instruments will help you to identify how you prefer to learn and how you prefer to process information. Neither of these instruments are used for psychiatric evaluations. These tests are used strictly to help individuals find out more about themselves and the people around them. Both instruments will be available online and each will take approximately 15-20 minutes. In addition, if you are interested in your results they will be e-mailed directly to you upon completion of the inventories. Your results will only be known to you and me, the researcher, and your name will not be used in the research. Instead you will be identified by the last four digits of your social security number. Additionally, Ms. Horigan has graciously offered extra credit to anyone who chooses to participate in the study. In order to participate you must:
1. Read the instructions for accessing BOTH instruments. 2. Take both inventories before May 1st. The websites will be locked after that
date. 3. Take both instruments. (the study is not valid if only 1 instrument is taken). 4. Your results will be e-mailed directly to you by the researcher.
Thank you so much for your participation, I really appreciate it. Sincerely, Stacey Rimmerman
126
Taking the LSI3 online
1. From your Internet browser (Netscape Navigator or Internet Explorer versions 4.0 or higher) go to HTTP://www.hayresourcesdirect.haygroup.com/lsi/default-new.asp?oz=476. This will bring you to the survey login page.
2. Enter a username – This must be your first name underscore last
name e.g. Joe_Sample 3. Enter a password - this is a personal password of your choice but it must
be 6 characters only (no more, no less!)
4. Enter the organizational password 0305PA
You can then access the test
127
Taking the MBTI® Instrument Online Thank you for participating in this research project. Instructions for taking the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® instrument online are provided below. It is essential for you to select the batch name Horigan to denote that you are participating in this particular study.
• Go to the web address http://online.cpp.com
• Login: (case sensitive) Enter capt for Account Login
• Password: (case sensitive) Enter takethembti for Account Password
• User ID: This is configured for you upon completion of your first instrument. No need to enter data here (unless you are returning to resume).
Choose the MBTI® Step I (Form M) instrument from the assessment column by clicking on the "Take It" button.
Note: DO NOT take the MBTI® Step II (Form Q). It is not the instrument being used for this research study.
• Select the batch for your program in the Assessment Information field as shown below.
• Fill out the personal information form (note that all demographic information is optional except for First Name, Last Name and Gender) and finally click on "Submit" when finished. Complete the instrument and click on the "Done" button.