Individuals tend to be different, to a degree, from one another especially in terms of personality and intelligence. As one may expect, such distinctions may also have an effect upon the task of selecting the most suitable study technique in a distance learning environment. Personally, after completing the personality assessment, I found out that I am best considered as a thinker.
Those mainly categorized as such, characteristically approach challenges and tasks through a validity-based approach always emphasizing the need to determine whether a method to be followed is logically plausible or not (Cater, Bishop, & Kravits, 2007). In agreement with this, the result of the intelligence evaluation highlighted the fact that I have advanced logical-mathematical skills while being least familiar with being naturalistic. Thus, it would be best to reflect upon the possible implications of such information in the context of the distance learning environment.
As being independent in accomplishing tasks is one of the suggested study techniques for thinkers (Carter, Bishop, & Kravits, 2007), doing so would not be difficult in distance learning. Since most of the time I am able to complete requirements at my own pace, it also becomes possible for me to comprehend and internalize lessons without intrusion at an efficient rate bringing forth positive results.
The suggested study techniques for those with proficient logical-mathematical intelligence, such as analytically designing a solution based on trends in data (Carter, Bishop, & Kravits, 2007), are similar to those given for individuals with a thinker type personality; hence, studying a task in advance in order to logically establish possible approaches and solutions would also be beneficial in the pursuit of achieving an optimal performance throughout the distance learning process.
Improving upon one’s less established aspects is without doubt an essential endeavor as well. In this sense, trying study techniques better suited to other intelligence or personality types may be the ideal approach to consider. Particularly, as mostly a thinker and least an adventurer, it would be best to try and merge problem solving approaches with more unconventional ideas from time to time.
For example, since one of the study techniques for adventurers is to think outside the box (Carter, Bishop, & Kravits, 2007), doing so when there seems to be a lack of proven approaches for task might result in appreciable results. As for the attempt to become more naturalistic, it seems that the only possible way to develop such intelligence would be to frequently reflect upon the connections between the lesson being tackled and the environment as a whole.
Learning my strengths as well as weak points, in addition to knowing such details about my classmates, is essential in establishing an optimal learning environment; through such, it would be possible for learners to complement one another and further develop simultaneously. When faced with the need to accomplish a collaborative work despite having to do so online, knowing each other’s strengths and limitations would allow for a more efficient process of completing the task; distributing responsibilities for example would be done in a more suitable manner.
Knowing when to provide proper support to fellow learners in parts of the task which they may not be highly capable in, such as the need to design and comprehend diagrams for those who are not adept in visual thinking, would be significantly easier. Therefore, identifying the personality and intelligence types of one’s self as well as those of other individuals is indeed a practical and advantageous pursuit especially in distance learning. Reference
Carter, C., Bishop, J., & Kravits, S.L. (2007). Keys to College Studying: Becoming an Active Thinker (2nd ed.). Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.