The last time I posted, the subject was essentially teaching styles, learning styles, and how the students and teachers are affected by this relationship.
Now I'd like to go into a bit more depth on the subject, or at least another aspect: personality. No matter how you look at, everyone has a personality that defines who they are, how they act, etc. And if you look at personality as being static or if you see it as being more surface-based and flexible (adaptable, in short), the fact is that some people are going to be vastly different than others. This effects learning style: how people study, absorb information, etc.
For instance, if you go by Jung's Theory of Psychological Types, you can see that "Sensors" are more likely to focus details and "observable facts." On the other hand, "Intuitives" are more likely focus on the big picture, on connection; synthesizing and the like.
The point, in part, is about intelligence. Someone who naturally notices details is more likely to have a good memory for detail and someone who naturally notices "connections" may have a better memory for general concepts or ideas. However, these things are not necessarily indicative of intelligence. It all comes back to the idea of playing your strengths; if one of your strengths happens to be a good memory for detail, you may be better at compiling various sources and forming a solid argument, so find ways to use this in the classroom or in choosing a career that suits your strengths. If your strength is more in the area of ideas, you may be better at brainstorming or synthesizing many ideas into one, general voice.
I'm sure that those in graduate classes have heard much of this before, in various forms, but there's always room for personal growth. Sometimes it's important to reflect; you may find that you missed something before.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hey Rob,
I have always been a little suspect of personality tests. I liked your part at the end: "sometimes it's important to reflect." Actually, I think that people can change personality types over time. Perhaps not in huge ways, but enough that if you recognized how much you have grown or changed, you might be able to make a few better decisions. Does that make any sense? At least as far as where you want your career or education to take you--looking at personality tests can provide some useful feedback. However, I would just suggest taking them every so often rather than getting stuck in one mode of thinking about yourself.
Hey Jason,
As far as personalities changing, I've looked into them quite a lot and, I could be wrong, but I've gotten the impression that a lot of it depends on how you view personalities. For instance, one viewpoint people have is to view the "base" personality as being static with other "functions" available that the person can develop; essentially a matter of preference as to how a person functions.
I think I understand what you're saying though and I agree that people grow or change at times and recognizing it is, I think, an important - though sometimes overlooked - part of the growth process.
I also agree that it's not good to get stuck in a "box." I think this is one of, if not the biggest, concern people have with personality tests. It really depends on how people deal with it though; simply reading a "description" and saying that it's 100% them is certainly a bit narrow. However, if they really delve into the complexities of personality theories and the like, I think they'll find that most of it is intended to be more complex than it comes across - there's just a lot lost in simplification.
Post a Comment