Collaborating With Different Personality Types

Collaborating with Different Personality Types

Mamchur, in Cognitive Type Theory and Learning Styles, describes the various learners and the need for differentiation:

 The Sensing Learner (p. 27) requires structured programs broken, “down into component parts.”  Prior knowledge assessment is necessary especially for the, “laying for success at the next level.”  This is a sequential learner that uses his/her five senses.  These students are interested in the concrete and the present.

The Intuitive Learner (p. 33) requires more independent learning and access to information.  This is type of learner needs, “plenty of opportunities to invent, guess;” he/she may want to further explore and adapts well under pressure.  This is an intense learner and is passionate about theories and possibilities; hence they may have a sense heightened intuition.

The Feeling Learner (p. 41) has a strong need for social interaction, but the dynamics of group work have to be cooperative, considerate and consensus-sharing.  This student is motivated by values, harmony, and empathy.  The feeling student is sensitive and may make subjective decisions based on their emotional balance. 

The Thinking Learner (p. 37) has a need to see reason, logic and are objective.  They respond to cause and effect.  These are competitive learners and have a strong need to succeed academically. 

The Judging Learner (p. 48) is characterized by the need for order, control, structure and closure.  Advance organizers are useful for introducing units.  This student likes to know the shape of the day, expects timely feedback with constructive criticism and dislikes changes in routine or surprises.  This is learner values efficiency.  He/she learns through analysis and processes.

The Perceiving Learner (p. 53) is an open-ended learner.  He/she is open, flexible, and adaptable to change.  This student needs to, “explore and discover.”  The teacher must offer a variety of options within a unit and allow the students to experiment each option before deciding on aspect for further study. 

As we all are aware by now, people are combinations of these traits.  In addition to the above, there are the overall arching extroverted and introverted personalities that make a difference if we prefer learning in an interactive group setting or prefer learning individually and through self-study.  Social constructivist theory tells us that we make meaning for ourselves via social interaction, which may be conflicting for some learners.    

Differentiation is a critical factor in designing classroom lessons; recognizing learner styles will help create a balanced atmosphere that benefits the majority. 

The following is an excerpt from my own paper on differentiation with respect to literacy.  It quotes several scholarly articles that all point to the importance of differentiation; if you ignore the references, it is actually pretty straightforward.  I underlined the relevant parts.

Authors Ruthanne Tobin and Alison McInnes in, “Accommodating difference: variations in differentiated literacy instruction in Grade 2/3 classrooms,” (2008) echo some of differentiation expert Carol Ann Tomlinson’s theory in, “Intersections between differentiation and literary instruction:  Shared principles worth sharing.”  (2009)  For example, the two researchers identify the heart of differentiated learning in literacy instruction (hereinafter referred to as DI), as the need to provide choices to learners or “multiple access routes” that focus on the same essential understandings, but allow for a variety of ways for the learner, “…to make sense of and demonstrate these understandings,” (Tobin and McInnes, 2008). Tomlinson identifies the four principles of DI.  The first premise is that, “Students differ as learners;” that is they all have their own backgrounds and experiences that shape their learning.  Tomlinson quotes two educational researchers, Cunningham and Allington who caution teachers not to teach, “…in ways that make all students alike…,” (Tomlinson, 2009).  Secondly, “Teachers must study their students to teach them well.” She encourages teachers to invest the time into studying their students perpetually, which in turn “shapes the way students react to each other.”  She recommends using a variety of assessment strategies to understands students such as, “…student surveys, observations, interviews, literary letters, think-alouds, anecdotal records, checklists, progress notes, exit slips, performance tasks, and reading portfolios,”  (Tomlinson, 2009).  The third principle is, “Effective teachers teach up.”  Here she advises that teachers must believe that all students have the capacity to learn but must both parties must be willing to work hard; teachers must have the ability to engage students so students can gain essential knowledge, understanding and skill in certain content areas and provide, “…systematic ladders of support that enable students to progress briskly…toward competence and confidence…” (Tomlinson, 2009).  The final principal states:  “Responding to student readiness, interest, and learning profile enhances student success.” Tomlinson says that student readiness is critical for academic growth.  The student interest level must be captured by offering ideas and pursuits worth investing in.  The learning profile, “Refers to the preference mode of or approach to learning and is shaped by learning style, intelligence preference, culture, gender, and interactions among those elements.” Tomlinson, Tobin and McInnes all agree that, “By opening up to the students a variety of additional routes to engaging with and exploring literacy, a group of discouraged students, for the first time in their school careers, began to let go of what Mueller (2001) calls their tortured relationship with literacy…” (Tomlinson, 2009).