Section A Part 1 – Who am I as a learner? 1. 1 What is learning? Nowadays, people believe that learning can enhance their status or values (Beagrie 2007). They trust that learning is a part of their lives (Beagrie 2007). Learning is related to the process of knowing and understanding information (Bransford, Sherwood, Hasselbring, Kinzer and Williams 1990). Student can create and evolve the knowledge structures by learning (Bransford, Sherwood, Hasselbring, Kinzer and Williams 1990). Learning style can allow learners to choose the right skills on learning (Gagne 1984).
In order to learn more easily and efficiently, people should understand their learning style (Gagne 1984). The learning style is an individual’s personality characteristics and the favorite ways of collecting, organizing and analyzing about the data (Fleming 2001). That means that the individual learning style may consistent with the personality trait (Fleming 2001). Moreover, learning is a collaborative process (Grabinger and Dunlap 1995).
Nowadays, student learns not alone from teacher and professional, but also from each other (Grabinger and Dunlap 1995).
Therefore, they can help each other build explicit and refined knowledge (Grabinger and Dunlap 1995). Students can learn better in a collective learning process if they know their team roles (Edmondson, Bohmer and Pisano 2001). Therefore, I have done three psychometric tests. The three psychometric tests included VARK, MBTI and Belbin. VARK can let me know my learning style (William and Richard 2004); MBTI can let me know my personality (Shu and Yang 2009); Belbin can let me know my team role (Woods 1992). 2. Learning Style
Learning Styles refers to the difference of learning method between individual (William and Richard 2004).
The characteristics of learning style are cognitive, affective, and psychological behaviors that show the learner’s perception, interaction and respond in the learning environment (NASSP 1979). VARK is the famous tool for learning style assessment (Drago and Wagner 2004). Therefore, I had done the VARK questionnaire in order to analyze my learning style. (you may like to reorganize this paragraph so that those related to learning style can be moved back to 1. while move those related to VARK to 1. 2. 1 to make your writing more concise and clear. ) 1. 2. 1 VARK The VARK questionnaire was developed at Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand, in 1995 (Apalska and Brozik). There are four main physiological learning styles (William and Richard 2004): 1) The visual learners: learn by demonstrations and descriptions. They like to use lists to keep pace and organize their thoughts. They are easily distracted by action. 2) The aural learners: learn by listening.
They like to be provided with aural instructions. They enjoy dialogues and prefer to work out problems by talking. They are easily distracted by noise. 3) The read/write learners: learn by taking notes during the lessons. They often draw things to remember them. They do well with hands-on tasks. 4) The kinesthetic learners: learn by doing. They like to make use of touching, moving and interacting with their environment. They prefer not to see or listen and generally do not do well in the classroom. Table 1: The result of VARK Learning Style |Scores | |Read/Write |8 | |Kinesthetic |8 | |Visual |6 | |Aural |4 |
Source: Appendix 1- VARK test result Remarks: The most two highest learning style are in bold In this test, I have got eight in Read/Write and Kinesthetic, six in Visual and four in Aural. The highest marks are Read/Write and Kinesthetic. The Read/Write learners like to learn by reading and writing (William and Richard 2004). I am agreed that I am a Read/Write learner. When I learnt how to use the new mobile phone, I read the instructions and then tried to use. In my learning experience, when I had the test or examination, I wrote the contexts for many times in order to remember them.
The Kinesthetic learners like to learn by action (William and Richard 2004). I am agreed that I am a kinesthetic learner. For example, I learnt cooking when I studied in secondary school. I ate the new dish before I learnt to cook this new dish. Then, I cooked this new dish by different methods. In the cooking process, I continuously improved my cooking skill. Finally, I found the best method to cook this new dish. According to Neil D. Fleming, the author of the VARK questionnaire, the teachers can teach better when the teachers can match the learning style to the students (Can? ld, 1988). In the other hand, the critics of VARK say that “knowing one’s learning style does not improve learning. ”, e. g. someone knows the height does not help to be taller (Fleming and Baume, 2006). 3. Personality In the real world, personality is the process of continuous self-definition that manages the processes of perception, act and experiences (Leontiey 2006). Moreover, personality is related to the action and consciousness (Leontiey 2006). Beside this, the use of personality as a selection measure for an individual work (Kichuk and Wiesner 1998).
Employer also can base on the personality characteristics of employee to distribute their job (Kichuk and Wiesner 1998). Therefore, I had done MBTI in order to analyze my personality. I believe that it can help me to choose my career. (If you have already introduced why you have to take Personality test and have explained clearly, then you do not need to repeat/elaborate here. Go straight to MBTI. ) 1. MBTI The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is the most favorite tool for measure personality (Shu and Yang 2009).
Myers and Briggs (1962) based on Jung’s theory of psychological types to develop the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. The MBTI include the four bipolar scales (Shu and Yang 2009): 1) Extraversion-Introversion (EI), testing the person is extrovert or introvert (not align with the other 3). 2) Sensing-Intuition (SN), testing how people like to collect data. 3) Thinking-Feeling (TF), testing how people like to make the decision. 4) Judging-Perceiving (JP), measuring how one chooses to approach life. I believe that this tool can make me more understand my personality type. Table 2: The result of MBTI ISTJ |ISFJ |INFJ |INTJ | |45% |49% |60% |56% | |ISTP |ISFP |INFP |INTP | |59% |68% |73% |64% | |ESTP |ESFP |ENFP |ENTP | |55% |60% |71% |66% | |ESTJ |ESFJ |ENFJ |ENTJ | |42% |51% |57% |48% | Source: Appendix 2-MBTI test result Remarks: The most two highest learning styles in bold In this questionnaire, I have got 73% in INFP and 71% in ENFP, which are the highest percentage. Intuitive (N) people are more focused on creating patterns and examining possibilities (Morgan and Barbour 2008). People with Feeling (F) are harmonizers (Morgan and Barbour 2008).
They make decisions based on personal feelings and values (Morgan and Barbour 2008). People who prefer the Perceiving (P) function enjoy spontaneity and keeping options open as long as possible (Morgan and Barbour 2008). The characteristics of intuition (N) are very suitable for me. When I studied in the secondary school, I needed to find information for my homework. If I found too many related information, I may assessed the reliability of information based on the website. Then, I selected the reliable information for my homework. (not a good example) I agreed that I am a people with feeling (F). I like to make decisions based on own feeling and value.
When I was make any important decision such as continue to study or go to work, I still make the decision based on my value??. The final decision was study. The reason was very simple. I thought that if I haven’t the college diploma, I couldn’t find the good job. (not a good example) I agreed that I am a People who prefer the Perceiving (P) function. I enjoy work spontaneity. For example, I had a summer job in this year. The summer job was clerk. The company of summer job was packaging company. When I finished the own task before the time of get off work, I also helped other staffs to package spontaneity. (not a good example) There is a gap between Introversion (I) and Extraversion (E).
Introverts are more focused on inner reflection, thinking through ideas, and written communication (Morgan and Barbour 2008). Extraverts are focused on the outer world and like to communicate through dialogue (Morgan and Barbour 2008). In the fact, I am an introvert. When I met new friends in Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education (Sha Tin), I didn’t talk to them too much. Normally, I could not talk about myself too much because I was unfamiliar with them. (not a good example) Additionally, I would like to communicate with others through writing. When I want to book the meeting with my friends, I like to send the message or e-mail rather than phoning.
This test can make me to understand more about my personal characteristic and good for my development (Williamson & Watson, 2007). Also, it can help the employer filling the position by suitable people (Kennedy & Kennedy, 2004) and set the suitable training programs for different people (McTuck & Shakesphere-Finch, 2006). why? Additionally, this test only can show the personal favorite, but cannot show the ability, intelligence, and probability of success (Kennedy & Kennedy, 2004). In order to analyze my ability in the team, I had done the Bebin test. 1. 4 Team Role The responsibility of the team members is to complete the task organization and coordination (Weekley and Ployhart 2006).
The behaviors of the team member include task allocations, time management, task sequencing, motivation and the understanding of member (Weekley and Ployhart 2006). Therefore, the effective team work can produce by the right balance of these different skills (Woods 1992). I would like to understand more about my team role through Belbin. (you may like to move this paragraph back to 1. 1 to make your writing more concise and clear. ) 1. 4. 1 Belbin In the early 1980s, the Belbin Self-perception Inventory (SPI) became a standard trainers’ tool (why? What is it? )(Woods 1992). This tool can make us to have the imperturbable view of teams and individuals (why? )(Woods 1992).
The Belbin team roles have different characteristics (Watkins and Gibson-Sweet 1997, Partington and Harris 1999, Lessem and Baruch 2000): (1) Plant: clever, imaginative and creative; (2) Resource Investigator: extroverted and curious; (3) Coordinator: ripe and reliant; (4) Shaper: active and impatient; (5) Monitor Evaluator: smart, tactical, prudential, critical and judgmental; (6) Teamworker: friendly, indecisive, impressionable, cooperative and attuned; (7) Implementer: realistic, patient, disciplined, dependable and conservative; (8) Completer Finisher: serious, methodical, perfective and anxious; (9) Specialist: concentrated and self-motivated.
I would like to show the result of Belbin and analyzed my team role. Figure1: The result of Belbin [pic] Source: Appendix C- Belbin test result Remarks: The highest two team roles in shade The test result shows that my highest two team roles are Completer Finisher and Implementer. Completer Finisher is serious, methodical, perfective and anxious (Watkins and Gibson-Sweet 1997, Partington and Harris 1999, Lessem and Baruch 2000). Implementer is realistic, patient, disciplined, dependable and conservative (Watkins and Gibson-Sweet 1997, Partington and Harris 1999, Lessem and Baruch 2000) I agreed that I am a Completer Finisher. I am an anxious person.
In my learning experience, when I did the group project, the team leader set the deadlines. If I started to do the project in Monday and the deadline was Friday. I also finished the task before or on Wednesday. That means that I like to finish the task immediately. I agreed that I am an Implementer. I am a disciplined, conservative and reliable person. For my assessment, I also finished before the deadline and strictly followed the suggestions. Besides this, my daily schedule was disciplined when I was studied in secondary school. My bed time was 6:00a. m from Monday to Friday. And the sleeping time was 10:00p. m from Monday to Thursday. (not good examples – try to relate in a group context)
The Belbin test can let us know the each person’s role in the team (Partington and Harris 1999). Beside this, it can show the strengths and weakness of the team (how? ) (Partington and Harris 1999). In the other hand, the result cannot show the team performance ((Jackson, 2002) since the member may not transform their ability to their team?? (Watkins and Gibson-Sweet, 1997). 5. Conclusion To conclude, the three psychometric tests help me to gain more understanding about my learning style, personality and learning style. The results point out that I am an introvert, would like to learn through writing and doing. I always place importance on task finish.
Moreover, my Belbin result identifies that I am reliable and disciplined persons. As a training assistant would be a suitable career choice for me. As a training assistant needs to be reliable and disciplined, I think developing my career as a training assistant can elaborate and use my strengths fully. Next, I would like to introduce my future career plan. Reference: (Harvard style) Look up your PP reference material to learn how to write Harvard style Bransford J. D. , Sherwood R. D. , Hasselbring T. S. , Kinzer C. K. , and Williams S. M. (1990), Anchored instruction: Why we need it and how technology can help. In D. Nix & R. Spiro (Eds,), Cognition, education, and multimedia: Exploring ideas in high technology, (pp. 15-141), Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers Grabinger R. S. and Dunlap J. C. (1995), RICH ENVIRONMENTS FOR ACTIVE LEARNING: A DEFINITION. Denver: University of Colorado National Association of Secondary School Principals (1979), Student Learning Styles – Diagnosing & Prescribing Programs. Roston, Va: NASSP William A. D. and Richard J. W (2004), Vark Preferred Learning Styles and Online Education: MRN [Internet], 27(7) November, P. 1. Available from: < http://search. proquest. com. eproxy. vtclib9. vtc. edu. hk:2048/docview/223544316/132C99DB19A1FF77B4D/2? accountid=29075#center> [Accessed 2 November 2011] Online-line self assessment- Belbin (2011) Available at: https://e-belbin. om/getset08 Accessed: 1 November, 2011 Online-line self assessment- MBTI (2011) Available at: http://www. teamtechno;ogy. co. uk/mmdi-re/mmdi-re. htm Accessed: 26 November 2011 Online-line self assessment- VARK (2011) Available at: http://www. vark-learn. com/english/index. asp Accessed: 24 November 2011 Apalska, A. and Brozik, D. (2006), Learning styles and online education. Campus – Wide Information Systems [Internet]. 23(5) June, pp. 325-335. Available from :< http://search. proquest. com. eproxy. vtclib9. vtc. edu. hk:2048/docview/218045934/fulltextPDF/132CEF4A7344A198559/1? accountid=29075#>[Accessed 3 November 2011] Canfield, A. 1988), Learning Styles Inventory Manual, Western Psychological Services, Los Angeles, CA Fleming, N and Baume, D. (2006), ‘Learning Style Again: VARKing up the right tree! ’. Educational Developments. 7(4), pp. 4-7. Leontiev, A. A. (2006), ‘Personality, Culture, Language’, Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 44(3), pp. 47-56 Wichuk, S. and Wiesner, W. (1998), ‘Work teams: selecting members for optimal performance’, Canadian Psycholoy, 39(1/2). Pp23. Shu, R. and Yang, Y. , (2009),“EXPLORING THE CONSTRUCT VALIDITY OF THE CHINESE VERSION OF THE MYERS-BRIGGS TYPE INDICATOR-G” Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal 2009, 37(5). pp. 591-592 Williamson, M. & Watson, R. 2007) ‘Learning styles research: Understanding how teaching should be impacted by the way learners learn: Part III Understanding how learners’ personality styles impact learning’, Christian Education Journal, 4(1), pp. 62-77. McTurk, C. & Shakespeare-Finch, J. (2006) ‘Barrier to employment: Personality and cognitive predictors of employment status, Australian Journal of Career development, 15(1), pp. 10 – 18 Morgan, A. & Barbour, K. (2008), ‘An Initial Study into the Personality Types of Undergraduate Business Students’, Proceedings of the Academy of Educational Leadership, 13(1), pp, 33-38 Weekley J. A and Ployhart R. E. (2006), Situational judgment tests: theory, measurement and application. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Woods, M. , (1992), ‘Improved Teamworking Using a Computer System: A Review of the Belbin Interplace III Expert System’, Executive Development, 5(3), pp10 Watkins, B. & Gibson-Sweet, M. (1997), ‘Sailing with Belbin’, Education and Training, 19(2/3), pp. 105-110 Partingon, D. & Harris, H. (1999), ‘Team role balance and team performance: An empirical study’, Journal of Management Development, 18(8), pp. 694-705. Jackson, C. (2002), ‘Predicting Team Performance from a Learning Process Model’, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17(1/2), pp. 6-13 Watkins, B. & Gibson-Sweet, M. (1997), ‘Sailing with Belbin’, Education and Training, 19(2/3), pp. 105-110
Gagne, R. M. , (1984), ‘Learning outcomes and their effects’, American Psychologist, 39, pp. 377-385 Drago, W and Wagner, R. J. , (2004), ‘Vark Preferred Learning Styles and Online Education’, Management Research News, 27(7), pp. 1-13 Edmondson, A. C. , Bohmer, R. M. and Pisano, G. P. (2001), ‘Disrupted routines: Team learningand new technology implementation inhospitals’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 685-716 Bertucci, A. , Meloni,C. , Conte, S. and Cardellini, L. (2005), ‘The role of personality, gender and interaction in a cooperative and in a computer supported collaborative learning task’, Journal of Science Education? , (6), pp. 2-36 Morgan, A. and Barbour K. , (2008), ‘An initial study into the personality types of undergraduate business students’, Proceedings of the Academy of Educational Leadership, 13(1), pp. 33-38 Williamson, M. and Watson, R. , (2007), ‘Learning styles research: Understanding how teaching should be impacted by the way learners learn: Part III Understanding how learners’ personality styles impact learning’, Christian Education Journal, 4(1), pp. 62-77. Fleming, N. , (2001), Teaching and learning styles: VARK strategies, Christchurch. New Zealand: N. D. Fleming. Beagrie, S. (2007), How to…improve personal productivity, Personal Today, Jul, pp. 27