Teaching Methods - MBTI

[GarmGarf]

What is the best way to teach people of the various different types?

This question can either be answered by analysing: the 16 separate types as wholes; the differences in the 4 dichotomies; or by the cognitive function (and polarization) preferences. (Which is the best way?)

 

[Oblivious]

You type them on the spot. It also happens to be great for conversation.

 

[Madoness]

You type them on the spot. It also happens to be great for conversation.

Many people are not interested in that kind of stuff, so there are no conversations with lots of them concerning this topic .

 

[niteshift]

Ignore "types". Treat each student as an individual. Analysis won't get you anywhere.

My sons' state primary school principle has a business card with says " Individualised Education". He was asked to remove it from the card by the education dept. The reason being, that if he did it, so everyone else would have to as well. He refused. So did the parents. The tag is still on his business card.

Sometimes analysis is warrented. In education, it serves no purpose.

cheers, niteshift

 

[GarmGarf]

Oh yeah, sorry people, I meant like: "what is the best way to go about teaching subjects to the different types", for example: "what is the best way to go about teaching an intuitive as opposed to a sensor" and such.

Sometimes analysis is warrented. In education, it serves no purpose.

Well, I just had a hunch that maybe the teaching of a student in a certain way could be more easy for their particular MBTI to absorb than some other methods of teaching.

 

[niteshift]

Hey Garm.

Unless you're one on one, then you're missing the point. You mean individual tutoring ?

cheers, niteshift

 

[GarmGarf]

Hey Garm.

Unless you're one on one, then you're missing the point. You mean individual tutoring ?

cheers, niteshift

Well this thread is for both individual and group teaching (e.g: an individual INTP student or a class of them).

 

[niteshift]

A class full of them ? Arghhhhh....... I'd be running ....

cheers, niteshift

 

[Madoness]

I guess the best way to start the conversation would be with having a few beers with friends and starting like: "Hey, have you heard about Myers-Briggs test. It puts us all in 16 psychological types that sound like quite accurate at some points. What do you think about it? Oh, you've never heard about it? It's on the internet. You can test yourself and know about yourself through it."

 

[GarmGarf]

I guess the best way to start the conversation would be with having a few beers with friends and starting like: "Hey, have you heard about Myers-Briggs test. It puts us all in 16 psychological types that sound like quite accurate at some points. What do you think about it? Oh, you've never heard about it? It's on the internet. You can test yourself and know about yourself through it."

Ok it looks like I conveyed what I intended to very poorly.

I am not referring to telling people about the MBTI. I am referring to teaching people about any subject.

There are many different teaching methods, and I have a hunch that some of these methods may work better for students of certain MBTIs, while some methods may not work so well for students of certain MBTIs.

 

[Madoness]

Ok it looks like I conveyed what I intended to very poorly.

I am not referring to telling people about the MBTI. I am referring to teaching people about any subject.

There are many different teaching methods, and I have a hunch that some of these methods may work better for students of certain MBTIs, while some methods may not work so well for students of certain MBTIs.

You don't have got to talk about the subject if you're mentioning the subject. It would not be really a matter for me, being it academic or not, only that it has to have the truth behind, and if it has then why and how and why other 'theories' are wrong.

 

[Death]

SP - hands-on approach
SJ - step by step / method
NT - debate
NF - analogy using animals and ninjas

I think I oversimplified everything...

 

[Reverse Transcriptase]

SPs play at work and play during play
SJs work at work and play during play
NTs work at work and work during play
and NFs like to watch all the people working and playing!

 

[Kidege]

Sometimes analysis is warrented. In education, it serves no purpose.

Out of the top of my head, here's some teaching methods/techniques/strategies (yes, there's a difference). I'm sure you can do the analysis yourself.

Written and oral exercises with fixed gradation.
Teacher exposition.
Emulation and competition among the students.
Planification through learning objectives.
School press.
Colaborative writing.
Problem solving.
Projects.
Case studies.
Computerized sequences.
Experiments.
Student exposition.


All of the above can be handled inductively or deductively. Some can be handled individually or colaboratively, in small groups or with the whole class.
And of course, in order to make it work, you have to know your students, their motivations, learning styles (oops) and their previous knowledge.

 

[eudemonia]

well one way to introduce the ideas is to get the group to take the test beforehand and determine the scores. You could then split the group, unbeknown to them, into two: say one group more I oriented and one group more E oriented. You could then ask them a simple question, when you come home tired on a Friday night, what do you like to do to unwind?

Each group presents their answers back and hopefully you should get some stark contrasts - you then introduce the idea of where people gain their energy from.

You could introduce similar exercises for each scale.

The group have to be up for it, interested in finding out more about themselves and in the instrument and also willing to have a bit of fun with each other. There has to be a high element of trust in the group so you need to know them quite well and to ask their permission beforehand. You have to be available for people to talk one to one with you after the group session.

For many groups this wouldn't be appropriate but for intact teams andwork groups who are up for it, it is a more interactive way of introducing the ideas.

 

[GarmGarf]

Eh, ok, yeah... how bout we try this with regards to one-on-one teaching first.


"What is the best way to go about one-on-one tutoring students of the different MBTIs?"

 

[niteshift]

"......Planification through learning objectives...."

Hey Kidege, you're getting seriously close to being a bureaucratic public servent. Oops, my bad, if you already are one. Is planification even a word ?

cheers, niteshift

 

[Decaf]

If you want to learn more about it, look up Jane Kise. She was the instructor for my MBTI certification course and has a PhD in Education and Leadership. Here's her latest book on the subject.

To the best of my understanding, the best use of MBTI isn't in splitting the group up. Its useful for varying the style to make it a more even playing field, but most importantly is in damage control. You can't teach a subject 16 different ways. In the end, however you teach is going to have to appeal to you, and that's going to be most interesting to your own type. The advantage is perspective. Being able to identify those struggling, help them cope and offer them alternatives. It isn't such a bad thing to learn how to learn in otherwise uncomfortable ways. Its only bad if that's all you're ever exposed to.

 

[Kidege]

If planification isn't a word I'll thank a mod for changing it.
Planning through learning objectives is/was a way of applying behaviourism to education. Pretty much everyone now agrees it sucked. Then again general agreement isn't the best way of assessing anything. That takes *cough* serious analysis.

If it looks like I'm taking exception to this matter it's because I am. No offense, but that sort of analysis is what I do for a living.

 

[Enne]

Hm... I had an idea about this once. It'd start as a research study on professors in universities and analyze their teaching philosophies, the trends of the schools where they got their credentials, their internalized expectations of students, and their cognitive preferences, as a means to group teachers by certain clusters (not MBTI). From there incoming students would be matched w/ professors who shared similar cognitive styles and objective philosophies. But it never left the random brainstorming stages for obvious reasons, like overflow, workplace readiness, time constraints of the study, and the possibility of limited selection.

I think when it comes to primary and secondary education, the point of most schools is to create good employees; not good scholars. By college, it depends on the university, and the discipline of study, and even then, the schools still have an "eye on the door". The problem with teaching to a certain style would be the fact that the person would have inherent weaknesses when it came time to relate to different people who'd been taught by different styles, and also the person would be limited by whatever blindspots the teaching style afforded (I think this maps back to that Socratic teaching conundrum).

If your goal is to teach the same skillset of standardized materials using different cognitive styles or preferances, such as visual-spatial, logical-mathematical, auditory, etc. then you'd have a better launching pad than with personality/MBTI. But then AGAIN, you'd run into trouble attempting to convey certain subject matter through a constricted medium.