The relationship between learning style and personality type of extension community development ...

186 Pages·2004·2.48 MB·English

Copyright by
Gregory A. Davis
2004
ABSTRACT

Little research has been conducted that examines the learning style and
personality type preferences of Extension Community Development Educators. This
descriptive correlational study examines the relationship between learning style and
personality type preferences of Extension Community Development program
professionals in Ohio. In addition, the study explores the presence of relationships of
learning style and personality type preferences to primary work assignment, length of
tenure, academic major, educational attainment, age, and gender.
More than 56 percent of the 67 Extension Community Development program
professionals involved in this study favored a field dependent learning style, as
measured by the Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT). The mean GEFT score for
the sample was 10.40, below the national mean of 11.4. Females were more field
dependent. Subjects with academic backgrounds in the physical sciences were more
field independent. Subjects with longer tenure in Extension were more field
dependent. Nearly 24 percent of study participants indicated a preference for the
ISTJ personality type as measured by the Personal Style Inventory (PSI). Males were
more than three times more likely to prefer gathering information using their senses
(sensing). Twice the number of female subjects (18) preferred gathering information
ii
through use of their unconscious (intuition) over males (9). Males preferred reacting
to information with logic (thinking). Females preferred reacting to information with
personal reflection and consideration for others (feeling). There was a negligible
level of association between learning style and personality type subscales.
The GEFT and PSI were used to gather data from Ohio State University
Extension Community Development program professionals that attended district-
level program meetings, completed the instruments, and provided usable data. While
study results were generalized only to those providing usable data, a sampling of non-
respondents revealed that non-respondent characteristics did not vary significantly
from the accessible population.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to recognize Jamie Cano for his confidence in my abilities; Nikki
Conklin and Susie Whittington for their support and direction; Annie Berry for her
assistance with data analysis; my family for all they have sacrificed so that I might
accomplish this task, and my Extension friends for their ability to keep me motivated
throughout this learning process.

iv
VITA

1989………………………………… Bachelor of Arts, The University of Findlay.

1993………………………………… M.P.A. Public Administration, Bowling Green
State University.

2004 to present……………………… Program Coordinator and Assistant Professor,
Community Development, Ohio State
University Extension & Dept of AEDE

2001- 2004 ………………………… District Specialist and Assistant Professor,
Community Development, Ohio State
University Extension, West District

1996 – 2001………………………… Extension Agent, Community Economic
Development, Ohio State University
Extension, Crawford County

1993 - 1996………………………… Senior Lecturer, Department of Political
Science, University of Findlay

PUBLICATIONS

Davis, G. A. (2004). Learning style preferences of extension educators in Ohio. The
Ohio Journal of Science, 104(1).

Davis, G. A. (2003). [Review of the book John Nolen and Mariemont: Building a
new town in Ohio]. The Community Development Journal, 34(1).

Thomas, J. R., Davis, G. A., & Sharp, J. (2003). Ohio Survey of Food, Agriculture,
and Environmental Issues. The Ohio Journal of Science, 103(1).

Davis, G. A. (2003). Using a retrospective pre-post questionnaire to determine
program impact. Journal of Extension, 41(4).

v
Davis, G. A. (2002). [Review of the book Emotional Impact: Passionate leaders and
corporate transformation]. Leadership Link, A quarterly publication of the Ohio
State University Leadership Center, Summer 2002.

Davis, G. A., & Thomas, J. R. (1999). Industrial attraction: The experience of the
Crawford County (Ohio) Development Board. In P. Schaeffer and S. Loveridge
(Eds.), Small town and rural economic development: A case studies approach. (pp.
98-103). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.

Davis, G. A. (1999). Organizing for central business district renewal. Journal of
Extension, 33(2).

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Human & Community Resource Development Dr. Garee Earnest
Area of Emphasis: Extension Education Dr. Scot Scher

Minor Areas: Research and Statistics Dr. Joseph Gliem
Community Development Dr. Jef Sharp

vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Abstract ...................................................................................................................... ..ii
Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................... .iv
Vita.............................................................................................................................…v
List of Tables .............................................................................................................…x
List of Figures ............................................................................................................xiii

Chapters:
1. Introduction ...........................................................................................................…1
Problem Statement .…7
Research Hypotheses .…8
Purpose and Objective of the Study ..............................................................…8
Definition of Terms .........................................................................................10
Limitations of the Study...................................................................................11
Need for the Study ...........................................................................................12

2. Review of Literature ..............................................................................................13
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................13
Learning Style.13
Learning Style Defined ....................................................................................14
Learning Style Models.....................................................................................15
The Kolb Model.15
The Myers-Brigs Model.18
The Witkin Model.27
Field Dependence & Field Independence ........................................................29
Witkin Early Measures of Field Dependence/Independence...........................31
Characteristics and Behaviors of Field Dependence .......................................32
Field Dependent Teaching Style......................................................................34
Characteristics and Behaviors of Field Independence .....................................36

vii
Field Independent Teaching Style ...................................................................38
Factors Related to Learning Style....................................................................41
Age.41
Gender.41
Inteligence.43
Academic Achievement .43
Vocational Interest .4
Academic Interest .45
Research Using Witkin’s Model to Determine Preferred Style.......................47
Learning Styles of Extension Educators ..............................................47
Learning Styles of Agricultural Educators ..........................................49
Summary of Learning Style .............................................................................50
Personality Type .53
Personality Type Defined .54
Personality Type Models .5
Myers-Brigs Model.5
Keirsey Temperament Theory .64
True Colors Type Model.65
Measures of Personality Type..........................................................................65
Myers-Brigs Type Indicator.65
Personal Style Inventory .67
Research Using the Myers-Briggs Model to Determine Preferred Style.........69
Preferred Style of Extension Educators ...............................................72
Preferred Style of Agricultural Educators............................................73
Learning Style an Personality Type.................................................................75
Summary of Personality Type .........................................................................76
Learning Style as Related to Personality Types ..............................................79
Summary of Review of Literature ...................................................................80

3. Methodology ...................................................................................................…. ..84
Purpose.…. .84
Research Hypotheses .……85
Objectives .……86
Population .……87
Instrumentation .…. .87
GEFT .……8
PSI.……89
Data Colection .….91
Data Analysis ..........................................................................................……92

viii
4. Findings............................................................................................................…103
Purpose and Objectives............................................................................…103
Research Hypotheses .…103
Objectives .…104
Limitations .…105
Sample Characteristics.…106
Learning Style.…109
Personality Type ...................................................................................... ...112
Relationship Between Learning Style and Personality Type ..................…117
Correlates of Learning Style and Demographic Characteristics..............…117
Correlates of Personality Type and Demographic Characteristics ..........…119

5. Conclusions, Implications and Recommendations .........................................…122
Summary .…12
Sample Characteristics.…12
Learning Style.…123
Personality Type . .124
Relationship Between Learning Style and Personality Type ..................…124
Relationship Between Learning Style and Selected Characteristics .......…125
Relationship Between Personality Type and Selected Characteristics ....…126
Conclusions and Implications .................................................................…128
Recommendations.…142
General Recommendations .…14

References ...........................................................................................................…146

Appendix A – Group Embedded Figures Test.....................................................…152

Appendix B – Personal Style Inventory...............................................................…155

Appendix C – Personal Style Inventory Scoring Sheet .......................................…158

Appendix D – Subject Characteristics Questionnaire..........................................…160

Appendix E – Analysis Of Extension Community Development Support Staff .…162

Appendix F – Non-Respondent Characteristics...................................................…171

ix