Posted in college freshmen, dissertation, first-year experience, first-year seminar, higher education, MBTI, Ph.D., student affairs, tagged Dissertation, higher ed, MBTI, Student Affairs on January 24, 2013 | Leave a Comment »
My dissertation examines aspects of Myers-Briggs® preferences and academic success in the first college semester. I became fascinated by the topic when I noticed trends in student academic performance and Myers-Briggs preference in my programs and decided to give it a closer look.
For more information, check out this great resource from Vanderbilt’s Center for Teaching: Learning Styles & Preferences.
What are your MBTI preferences?
Posted in college freshmen, critical thinking, diversity, Facebook, financial aid, fortitude, Graduation, higher education, perseverance, scholarships, social networks, student affairs, student loan debt, Value, tagged higher ed, Student Affairs, student loan debt, value of a college education on December 2, 2012 | Leave a Comment »
When I read yet another article minimizing the value of a college education I am challenged by thoughts of privilege. Yes, Steve Jobs, an individual I greatly admire, was a college dropout, but at least he had the opportunity to give it a try. Mark Zuckerberg’s intelligence and initiative is without question, but how many students can realistically include Harvard on their college wish list? And then walk away from the opportunity?
I do not discount hard work, enterprise, and determination. But for those of us who are simply above-average, or first-generation, or of a marginalized population, college is the pathway to get a step ahead, a leg up, a move toward potential success. Yes, student loan debt and college costs demand answers, but denying the value of learning, but for an elite few, is not the answer. Just say Go. Go to college.
Posted in college freshmen, first-year experience, fortitude, friends, graduate school, higher education, perseverance, Ph.D., student affairs, tagged higher ed, Student Affairs on October 26, 2012 | Leave a Comment »
Happy Anniversary to to the eighteen and life blog!
Much has happened here in the last four years. Each post reminds me of the events, coursework, research, and friendships that have framed this blog. The topic cloud on the right highlights my work and my passions: student affairs, higher education, first-year students. As the posts have been sparse this year while I work on my dissertation, I appreciate that you are sticking with me.
Here’s a video reminder that as doors open for you, be sure to pay it forward and open doors for others.
Posted in college freshmen, first-year experience, first-year seminar, graduate school, higher education, MBTI, Orientation, Ph.D., postpositivist, student affairs, tagged education research, higher ed, MBTI, postpositivist, Student Affairs on September 9, 2012 | Leave a Comment »
Dilbert January 25, 2000
This overview of research paradigms assembled by Laura Pasquini inspired me to share my own postpositivist worldview and the research shaping it. As a postpositivist, I search for context and believe that causes determine outcomes. Thus, when type assessments collected in my first-year seminar showed trends for population oversampling and type preferences relating to academic success, or the lack thereof, I had to do more digging.
Academic success in the first college semester is widely believed to affect the eventual success or graduation of the new college student. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® is not an identifier of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning styles but is beneficial for assessment of learning preferences and processes rather than the learning behaviors of most learning style inventories (Jensen, 2003). Jensen describes the MBTI® as the most comprehensive assessment of learning style assessments attributing to instrument norming, length of development time, and sixteen specific approaches to student learning. He asserts that as the MBTI is a personality type assessment, and type is generally static, it is more useful than learning style assessments for measuring student behavior or performance which may fluctuate, dependent upon the learning experience. As institution type and instructor type preferences can frequently differ from student type preferences, an understanding of type theory can assist educators and learners in goals of student success.
As students move toward campus integration they seek congruence and comfort in a campus culture. Type theory and the MBTI can be helpful in moving students toward this goal. Kalsbeek (1986, 2003) reported on the TRAILS tracking tool that aids university communities in reviewing MBTI data in comparison with available student data to provide a research base for retention strategies. Students at a medium-size private university were administered the MBTI and consented to having their scores merged with ACT/SAT scores and other entry and demographic data sources. Academic results, program of study and enrollment status of the students were tracked in subsequent semesters. The tracking research found ACT/SAT scores as the best predictor of academic performance in the first semester but also revealed that Myers-Briggs preferences for Introversion, Perception and Intuition were found to be statistically significant in their influence on first semester grades. Type data was also found to correlate with entering student profiles as to reasons for attending college, performance on college admission standardized tests and first-term academic achievement. Each of these correlations is helpful to campus retention efforts by explaining possible shifts in college entry data and academic success. As failure to find academic success is a major factor in student persistence, Kalsbeek (2003) emphasizes that the MBTI instrument is useful for academic success programs. It can be used to identify special challenges for students, as a method for responding to students in need of academic support, and for “facilitating a good educational fit between the learner and the instructor,” (p. 109).
Jensen, G. H. (2003). Learning styles. In J. A. Provost & S. Anchors (Eds.), Using the MBTI instrument in colleges and universities. Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.
Kalsbeek, D. H. (1986, June). Linking learning style theory with retention research: The TRAILS project. Paper presented at the Association for Institutional Research forum, Orlando FL.
Kalsbeek, D. H. (2003). Campus retention: The MBTI instrument in institutional self-studies. In J. A. Provost & S. Anchors (Eds.), Using the MBTI instrument in colleges and universities (pp. 87-122). Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.
Posted in college freshmen, higher education, Value, tagged higher ed, value of a college education on June 19, 2012 | Leave a Comment »
A comparison of weekly pay by educational attainment illustrates that education pays.
Note: Data are for persons age 25 and over. Earnings are for full-time wage and salary workers.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey.
Posted in college freshmen, financial aid, Graduation, higher education, student affairs, student loan debt, tagged higher ed, student loan debt on June 16, 2012 | Leave a Comment »
John McPherson adds his twist to the challenges of student loan debt at Close to Home.
Posted in college freshmen, financial aid, higher education, student affairs, student loan debt on June 10, 2012 | Leave a Comment »
Posted in college freshmen, financial aid, first-year experience, higher education, scholarships, student affairs, student loan debt, Value, tagged value of a college education on February 23, 2012 | Leave a Comment »
The Census Bureau announced that three in ten adults held a bachelor’s degree in 2011. This is quite a jump considering that as recently as 1998 less than 25% of adults had a four-year degree. Regretfully, our global ranking for college degrees is still dropping. Despite continuing arguments about the value of certain degrees, it makes you think this whole college education thing may be catching on.
…the data suggest that going to school remains a shrewd investment. Median monthly pay for a professional degree reached $11,927 in 2009. That was more than twice the monthly pay for someone with a bachelor’s degree: $5,445. By contrast, a high school diploma was worth $3,179 a month, and an elementary school education yielded $2,136 a month. ~Daniel de Vise, Washington Post
More on the value of a college education…
Posted in college freshmen, critical thinking, financial aid, fortitude, higher education, perseverance, student affairs, student loan debt on January 17, 2012 | Leave a Comment »
I have written before about how challenging I find suggestions that college has no value. When research suggests that learning or critical thinking is not occurring on the college campus, I know that I see otherwise at my university, with my students. Does the academe have work to do? You bet. But creating a society of education privilege where only certain individuals are encouraged to pursue a degree is not an answer.
This Chronicle editorial suggests we are already creating that privilege by pricing a large portion of the population out of the higher education pool.
…going to college is worth it, but going to any college at any price may no longer be worth it. ~Jeff Selingo
But for another viewpoint here is an interesting debate of whether too many students are attending college. It highlights the argument that increased access to higher education has little influence on economic growth. And although I find this argument insulting to education and our students, it is worthy for discussion. Who decides who attends college?
To ask whether too many people are going to college begs another question: If too many people are going to college, then who are these people? How should we as a society ration a more restricted level of educational opportunity? ~Peter Sacks
Consider the students in your office today. Which ones could you single out as not being eligible for higher education?
Posted in APTi, class activity, college freshmen, critical thinking, first-year experience, first-year seminar, higher education, leadership, leadership development, MBTI, Orientation, student affairs on November 23, 2011 | 1 Comment »
I’ve got a problem. There are aspects of my personality that I can’t control. ~Bruce Banner
Much as student development theory helps us to understand differences in students served in higher education, understanding differences of psychological type in students may also enhance student success. The assessment of psychological type is based upon Carl Jung’s theory that human behavior is not random and that patterns of mental functions exist in the population. Following this conceptual foundation, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, MBTI™, has become the most widely used instrument for determining type preferences in business, personal coaching and on college campuses. It was developed by the mother-daughter team of Katherine Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers with the foundations of orientation and organization to the outer world as a framework to guide individuals through the constructive use of differences. The MBTI instrument asks a series of self-report forced-choice questions to define individual preference opposites for personal energy, taking in information, making decisions, and organizing one’s world. Based upon responses to these questions, an individual is assigned a type preference for each pair of opposites which when combined; create sixteen individual four-letter type codes.
There are four MBTI type dichotomies or opposite preferences and each has a different influence on learning. The word preference is used to refer to the innate tendency one has in each of the psychological dichotomies. The principle of preference is frequently illustrated in type facilitations by asking participants to write their signature with their non-dominant hand. Generally, participants will describe this exercise as awkward, uncomfortable or not a preferred activity, but one they are able to complete. Each individual has a preference for daily functions, but is able to operate out of preference, as needed. The preference pairs include where a person gets their energy, categorized as Extraversion and Introversion; how an individual takes in information or Sensing and Intuiting; the decision-making process of Thinking and Feeling; and the orientation to and organization in the outer world of Judging and Perceiving. Individuals use each aspect of the personality pairs daily, but have a preference for one that is more comfortable or useful to the self.
Extraversion and Introversion. Extraversion and Introversion are expressions of where an individual gathers personal energy. Extraversion (E) is the energy that develops from engaging with people, objects and events. Externally expressing interests and interacting with others is invigorating for extraverts. They learn best in situations that include movement, action and conversation and prefer to connect theories and facts with personal experience. Introversion (I) is a reflective, inward coordination with thoughts and ideas. Introverts look internally for thoughts and energy. They think best in solitude and prefer advance notice before sharing or acting in a learning situation.
Sensing and Intuition. Sensing and Intuition are the functions for absorbing information. The Sensing (S) perception is the process of awareness and accumulating information through the physical senses. Sensing is a pragmatic function relying on details, sequenced lists, and consistency. Sensors learn best with sequential learning from concrete to abstract and tend to excel at memorization. The Intuitive (N) perception is future oriented and uses hunches and sees possibilities to provide explanations. Intuitive preference persons value patterns and abstract ideas and learn through imaginative tasks and theoretical topics with ease.
Thinking and Feeling. Thinking and Feeling are the decision-making or judgment processes of type. Thinking (T) is the objective decision-making process using standards and criteria to analyze information or situations to improve situations or performance. Thinking preference individuals are motivated in learning by logic and respect for their competence. The Feeling (F) decision-making preference is subjective and based upon personal values for accommodating harmony and the improvement of personal conditions for others. Individuals with Feeling preference are motivated in learning by personal encouragement, values and the human dimension of a topic or lesson.
Judging and Perceiving. Judging (J) is the process of engaging with the outer world preferring organization, structure, and a planned life. Those preferring Judgment tend to experience time in specific segments. They are driven to seek closure or finish tasks in those specific time periods. Judging preference learning thrives on task completion, structured learning and specific goals. The Perceiving (P) preference values autonomy, flexibility and spontaneity. They experience time as an uninterrupted flow and are open to new information as they experience and process. They prefer open learning environments that rely less on deadlines and structure.
Psychological type assessment can been helpful in allowing detection of interpersonal roadblocks and miscommunication related to type preferences, particularly for students in the transition from high school to college. Through intentional examination of type and how it relates to learning preferences, opportunities emerge for enabling students to understand more about themselves in this transition. Although the MBTI is not designed to be a predictor, examining type preference anomalies to enhance student services and resources may lead to increased student success and retention.
What is your type? Do you use the MBTI in your student success initiatives?
