Investigation of the Relationship Between Personality Type and Selected Teaching Strategies in Developing Students' Science Process Ability, Logical Thinking Ability and Science Achievement.

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether there is a relationship between personality type and process skills, logical thinking and science achievement. It also examined whether certain personality types can improve their process and /or logical thinking abilities through an inquiry oriented teaching strategy. Data were collected from 91 ninth grade physical science students who had completed the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). They were then given three tests; the Test of Integrated Process Skills (TIPS), the Group Assessment of Logical Thinking (GALT), and a physical science aptitude test. The subjects were divided into an experimental group of 41 students and a control group of 50 students using intact classes. The experimental group participated in a weekly inquiry oriented activity for 15 weeks. The intervention activities required about 10% of class time. At the end of the time period the three tests were re-administered to both groups. Statistical procedures included the t test and regression analyses. Results of the study indicated that the intuitive (N) personality type students showed significant improvement over the sensing (S) types on the GALT and TIPS tests. None of the other personality types (E-I, T-F, J-P) showed a significant improvement in their post-test mean scores. Scores on the pre-test indicated a significant difference between males and females on the TIPS and GALT. On the post-tests, significant differences were again found between males and females on the TIPS. No significant differences were found on the GALT post-test showing that the females did improve from the intervention. It was concluded that the intuitive type personality improved their logical thinking through the use of the inquiry intervention. The intervention was useful for females because they showed marked improvement over the males. The use of the intervention did not adversely affect their science learning.PhDCurriculum developmentUniversity of Michiganhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/160989/1/8612572.pd