Two reports were produced by the Learning and Skills Research Centre in 2004: "Learning Styles and Pedagogy in post-16 Learning" https://crm.lsnlearning.org.uk/user/order.aspx?code=041543 and "Should we be using Learning Styles?" https://crm.lsnlearning.org.uk/user/order.aspx?code=041540&src=XOWEB which give thorough and critical reviews of various instruments including MBTI. Although aimed at practitioners in the FE sector, the recommendations give food for thought. Worth a read.
Ann
Ann Barlow,
Head of Researcher Development Team,
Humanities Faculty,
Devonshire House,
The University of Manchester,
Tel: 0161 275 0298
-----Original Message-----
From: learning development in higher education network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Samuels
Sent: 20 June 2011 14:35
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Student Variability
Although I am not an expert in this area, perhaps I could suggest the following research in support of the personality theory approach:
Crozier, W. (1997) Individual learners: personality differences in education, Routledge
McCrae, R. & Costa, P. (1997) Personality trait structure as a human universal
The 5 factor model developed by the latter is promoted in the former. I think this has a lot more of a research basis to it than MBTI.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: learning development in higher education network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Colin Bryson
Sent: 20 June 2011 14:27
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Student Variability
I am with Nick on that...these 'typing methods' are useful to help individuals analyse themselves but not at all good for categorising groups - I am not a great fan of archetypes much but there may be some mileage in allying demographics and 'real' stats with something like Dubet's 'ways of being a student'. That's a more sociological 'classification' - focuses on such as intrinsic interest in the subject, integration into the university and probably the most important, the personal project - why are they in HE in the first place. In fact a big UK project - the SOMUL project - looked at subject differences a few years ago - using all sorts of interesting methods Brennan, J., Edmunds, R., Houston, M., Jary, D., Lebeau, J. Osborne, M. and Richardson, J. (2010) Improving what is learned at university. Routledge: London Of course there are lots of survey instruments from the USA and Australia that have given daa on this - there is pre-entry version of the NSSE for example.
Good luck
Colin
Colin Bryson
Director of the Combined Honours Centre
Level G Daysh Building
Newcastle University
http://raise-network.ning.com/
0191 222 6389
________________________________
From: learning development in higher education network [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nick Bowskill [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 20 June 2011 14:10
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Student Variability
Hi Sharon,
I would personally put Myers Briggs with reading tea leaves. I would also sit them alongside Belbin and his team roles too. Both have an idea that you declare yourself to be a particular type of person, regardless of the context or situation. On that basis you are then encouraged to view yourself as suited or unsuited to a given activity. Or if you're putting a team together you are supposed to assemble a group with the full 'set' of types.
The actual outcome of those processes, MBTI and Belbin, is that you are learning their structure instead of learning about the issue. In fact, MBTI and Belbin look more like a family board game to me rather than anything intelligent people should be using for research or for decisions. ;-)
A more scientific approach would investigate each collective situation to explore similarities and differences between different cohorts or different subjects. Otherwise, using MBTI and Belbin, you'd regard everything as fixed which we know isn't right.
Best Wishes,
Nick
On 20 June 2011 13:55, Kim Shahabudin <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
What an interesting question. Though, I suspect, not easily answered.
What we found when doing research for the LearnHigher CETL was that there were so many different variables that contributed to each of the multiple learning communities that existed even within a single institution, that it was extremely difficult to generalise. In fact I found Tamsin Haggis's application of complexity theory to higher education very useful when analysing data on this topic.
That said, we have observed (though not recorded) a number of explicable micro-trends within our own institution. These included greater numbers of students with Asperger Syndrome in disciplines which impose order on the world like Maths, Systems Engineering and Meteorology, for instance; a number of dyslexic students attracted to studying Classics who have not studied the subject previously, and therefore not had the experience of failure in it.
I'm still not convinced that generalising is possible, or even helpful. But a collection of case studies would be extremely interesting.
Best wishes,
Kim
________________________________
Dr Kim Shahabudin, FHEA, Study Adviser, Study Advice & Maths Support 1st floor Carrington Building, Whiteknights, University of Reading, RG6 6UA * 0118 378 4236/4218 * www.reading.ac.uk/studyadvice<http://www.reading.ac.uk/studyadvice>
Winner of Student Nominated Award for Outstanding Contribution to Teaching and Learning, 2010
________________________________________
From: learning development in higher education network [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] on behalf of Sharon Gedye [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
Sent: 20 June 2011 13:07
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Student Variability
Do certain subjects attract certain types of students and if so what is the evidence? Is there any truth in stereotypes?
I am interested in things like differences in learning styles, expectations, goals, personality types, pastoral/emotional demands, learning difficulties etc.
Can anyone help? I would be very grateful.
Dr Sharon Gedye (PhD, FHEA). Educational Developer.
Teaching and Learning Directorate, Room 114, 3 Endsleigh Place, University of Plymouth, Devon, PL4 8AA
T: +44(0)1752 584 534. Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
--
--------------------------------------
Nicholas Bowskill,
Faculty of Education,
University of Glasgow
Shared Thinking - an Empathic Pedagogy
Web Site: http://www.sharedthinking.info<http://www.sharedthinking.info/>
|
