Reaching all the students: the feedback lecture.

The article presents an analysis of four learning styles and suggests a teaching methodology. The Feedback Lecture is a modification of the traditional lecture that can be utilized to engage students with differing learning styles. Developed at Oregon State University to offer instruction to an increasingly diverse student population, the method offers attractions to the four learning styles predicted by Isabel Myers' interpretation of Jungian typology.

**********

In 1918 William Heard Kilpatrick of Teachers College Columbia published "The Project Method." The article prompted considerable debate and kicked off a national methods quest as educators searched for the ultimate methodology--the one that would transcend poor teaching as well as poor students. As anyone close to education can attest, the search continues.

Running contrary to public clamor that all persons be treated alike, is a private desire to be recognized as unique. People are not the same; the fact has been recognized for centuries! For educators, the obvious though often overlooked conclusion is that different people require different treatments. In ancient Greece, Hippocrates characterized persons as Sanguine, Choleric, Phlegmatic, or Melancholic (Brock, 1929). During the 1920s Ernst Kretschmer, a German professor of Psychiatry and Neurology, and the Swiss Psychologist Carl Jung both published books concerning personality type. In discussing the three body types today known as Endomorph, Mesomorph, and Ectomorph, Kretschmer (1970) utilized cycloid and schizoid to refer to what his translators would later call temperament. Jung (1962) identified four basic psychological functions, thinking, feeling, sensation, and intuition, and postulated that if one of the functions was preferred and consistently exhibited by an individual, a definite personality type would be discernible.

The Theory

Isabel Myers, creator of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), continued the line of thought begun by Kretschmer and Jung, while providing researchers an instrument to further analyze human behavior. Myers (1962) extended Jung's conception of the four functions by linking Sensing/ Intuition as a distinct continuum and Thinking/Feeling as another. Sensing/Intuition are viewed as opposing orientations to data gathering while Thinking/Feeling are seen as the two poles of data processing. Individuals tend to obtain knowledge by sensing (directly) or intuiting (indirectly) and process that information logically (thinking) or emotionally (feeling).

Sensing/Intuition

The old cliche about not seeing the forest because of the trees gets directly to the heart of the distinction between the way Sensors (S) and Intuitors (N) encounter their environment. Intuitors see the big picture but are skimpy on details, while Sensors often get so involved with details that they fail to see the big picture. Kiersey and Bates (1978) characterized Intuitors as "extraterrestrial" and Sensors as "earthbound." Sensors have a tendency to see Intuitors as flighty and unrealistic while Intuitors often regard Sensors as plodding and unimaginative. Whereas early estimates by Myers (1962) and Kiersey & Bates (1978) had indicated 25-30 percent of the general population to be Intuitors, more recent assessments (Myers & McCaulley, 1985) based upon five years of data collecting, indicate that the figure may be lower, somewhere between 15 and 28 percent.

Thinking/Feeling

The head versus the heart might best sum up how Thinkers/Feelers process information. Thinkers remain detached and impersonal whereas Feelers tend to personalize. Thinkers are apt to be viewed as cold and detached while Feelers may be characterized as too emotional or illogical. Although Kiersey and Bates (1978) acknowledged a 50-50 split in the general population, they reported that 6 out of 10 males prefer the Thinking mechanism while 6 out of 10 females exhibit a preference for Feeling.

Figure 1 presents Sensing/Intuition and Thinking/Feeling as the X and Y-axes of an intersecting grid where the resulting four quadrants, ST, SF, NT, and NF, represent the attributes of four distinct learning styles. Assuming the percentage of Intuitors in the general population to be 20, would suggest that out of 100 individuals 40 will be STs, 40 SFs, 10 NTs, and 10 NFs.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Figure 2 is a graph taken from Myers and McCaulley (1985) comparing the sixteen distinct MBTI types of 3,503 high school students with respect to aptitude (SAT or intelligence scores) and GPA. Although Myers cautioned that a more accurate portrayal of the general population would have to include dropouts and students in other comparable institutions, the illustration reveals a striking advantage for Intuition (N). Duck and Ogden (1990) alluded to a dichotomy in learning styles between Intuitors and Sensors. The difference can best be illustrated by comparing Jerome Bruner's discovery approach with the structured/systematic learning design of Robert Gagne". Intuitive students will take readily to Bruner's top-down, no-holds-barred search for meaning, whereas Sensors may find it disjointed and confusing. Conversely, Sensing types will appreciate the sequential, step-by-step, hierarchical climb of Gagne, which their Intuitive classmates often view as boring and too slow. Intuitive types are more often self-starters, do better on questions which require organization and originality, deal more easily with abstractions, and are seen by teachers as more insightful in their comments and questions than are sensing types. Although, as noted earlier, the percentage of Intuitors in the general population seems to lie somewhere between 15 and 30 percent, that percentage has been observed to increase with each succeeding level of educational attainment. As reported by Myers and McCaulley (1985), the representation of Intuitors in fifty-five samples selected on the basis of high creativity ranged from 53 to 100 percent. Similarly reported, a group of National Merit Finalists included 83 percent Intuitors. Conversely, an early study by Myers, as reported by Lawrence (1978) revealed that 99 percent of 500 students who had dropped out of school before the eighth grade were Sensing types. Myers and McCaulley's data also favor Thinkers over Feelers but supporting data are considerably weaker than those documenting Intuitors over Sensors.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Learning Styles

Figure 3 describes the four "learning styles" dictated by the model depicted in Figure 1. Each centers on of two of Jung's functions as modified by Myers. Although the other two attributes are not lacking, the two presented are the favorites and tend to be most developed.

Sensing + Thinking (ST)

ST individuals are concerned with facts and details. The linear, analytical aspects of their thinking facilitate logical conclusions. Their favorite question is "What?" and they learn best by doing (independent study).

Sensing + Feeling (SF)

SFs also deal in facts and details but, unlike the impersonal, detached STs, trust feeling rather than judgement. Their favorite question is "What if?" and they learn best through guided study (coaching).

Intuition + Thinking (NT)

The preferred question of the NT is "How? They are most interested in theories and in building models to account for observed phenomena. Their favorite method of learning is the lecture.

Intuition + Feeling (NF)

"Why?" is the overwhelming question of NFs, who deal in possibilities and learn best through discussion. They must have a reason for doing things.

The Classroom

For years teachers have acknowledged individual differences and, in many cases, have tried to provide for them in classroom situations. Figure 4 attempts to portray a circular arrangement of methodologies in terms of increasing/decreasing teacher and student responsibility as each relates to MBTI learning style. Too often, however, student needs or preferences are sublimated to the overwhelming task of presenting large bodies of information to large numbers of students in small periods of time. Although it is generally considered to be poor in terms of learner retention over time, the traditional lecture is still the most widely used method of classroom instruction at the high school and college level. In terms of our discussion, the lecture would have greatest appeal to students with NT learning styles. While other types may be capable of learning via the lecture, their dislike may be so strong that they are unable to do their best work.

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

The Feedback Lecture

Developed at Oregon State University in 1974 (Osterman (1984) as a means of coping with a perceived change in the nature of incoming students, making more efficient use of faculty, and utilizing new and effective learning resources, the feedback lecture touches upon each of the four learning styles. Used effectively, the method enables each student to engage in his or her favorite learning mode during the course of each lesson.

Study Guide

A study guide containing a pretest, objectives to be covered, new vocabulary, important visuals, study tips, and postlesson activities is given to students a few days prior to the actual class session. The guide serves to focus student attention on what the instructor views to be the important items to be covered. The guide appeals to independent STs and answers the "Why?" of NFs.

Lecture

Lectures are divided into segments of twenty minutes or less, depending on time available. An accompanying lesson outline is provided for students to follow. A five to ten minute session in which small groups of students discuss aspects of the preceding lecture follows each segment. The lecture itself appeals to NTs and STs, while SFs appreciate the outline.

Discussion

During the discussion sessions, which appeal to SFs and NFs, students meet in small (2 to 3) groups to discuss questions (prepared or spontaneous) arising from the lecture. The instructor circulates to be of assistance and may choose to collect group summaries.

In practice, the sequence of a fifty minute class period might be: study guide/pretest activities prior to class, 15 minute lecture, 10 minute discussion, 15 minute lecture, 10 minute discussion plus summary and/or assignment. Times could be adjusted to meet existing schedules. While the feedback lecture, like any other methodology, should not be used to the exclusion of others, it may effectively be interspersed with hands-on and other approaches to form a balanced plan of instruction.

Summary

The Question of personality type can be traced to the Greeks. In the 1920s the writings of Kretschmer and Jung were instrumental to the creation of a better understanding of why people are the way they are and in providing teachers with a framework for explaining why persons learn in the ways they do. Isabel Myers utilized Jung's four functions--Sensing, Intuition, Thinking, and Feeling--in creating a system which predicts the existence of four distinct learning styles: ST, SF, NT, and NF.

The feedback lecture was developed at Oregon State University at a time when questions regarding the changing nature of students seeking higher education came in conflict with existing staff and resources. The method, which involves prelecture activities, short lectures, discussion groups, and postlecture activities, contributes directly to an instructional delivery system that addresses each of Myers' four learning styles. The feedback lecture enables students to learn by their own strengths while providing ample opportunity for developing related strengths in other areas.

Figure 3. Characteristics of the Four Learning Styles
(after Myers, 1980).

People who        Sensing/           Sensing/
prefer:           Thinking           Feeling

Focus their       Facts              Facts
Attention on:

and handle        Impersonal         Personal
these with:       analysis           warmth

Thus, they tend   Practical and      Sympathetic
to become:        matter-of fact     and friendly

And find scope    Technical skills   Practical help
for their         with facts and     and services for
abilities in:     objects            people

People who        Intuition/         Intuition/
prefer:           Thinking           Feeling

Focus their       Possibilities      Possibilities
Attention on:

and handle        Impersonal         Personal
these with:       analysis           warmth

Thus, they tend   Logical and        Enthusiastic
to become:        ingenious          and insightful

And find scope    Theoretical and,   Understanding/
for their         technical          Communicating
abilities in:     developments       with people

References

Brock; A.J. (1929). Greek medicine. London: J.M. Dent & Sons, Ltd.

Duck, H. & Ogden, W.R. (1990). An essay on Jungian typology and its implications for education. Educational Resources Techniques, 29(1), 17-21.

Jung, C. (1926). Psychological types. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & Company, Inc.

Kiersey, D. & Bates, M. (1978). Please understand me. Del Mar, California: Prometheus Nemesis Books

Kilpatrick W. H. (1918). The project method. Teachers College Record, 10(4), 319-35.

Kretschmer, E. (1970). Physique and character. New York: Cooper Square Publishers.

Lawrence, G. (1982). People types and tiger stripes. Gainesville, Florida: Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc.

Myers, I.B. (1980). Introduction to type. Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Myers, I.B. (1962). The Myers-Briggs type indicator. Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Myers, I.B. & McCaulley, M.H. (1985). Manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Ogden, W.R. (1985). Teaching all the students all the time: The feedback lecture. The Texas Science Teacher, 14(2), 13-15.

Ogden, W.R. & Rodgers, C. (1993). Coordinated thematic science: Some words of caution. The Center Review, 2(1), 6-15.

Osterman, D.N. (1984). The feedback lecture: Matching teaching and learning styles. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 84(10), 1221-1222.

William R. Ogden, Professor and Department Head, Secondary and Higher Education, Texas A&M University-Commerce.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. William R. Ogden, Secondary and Higher Education, Texas A&M University-Commerce, Commerce, TX 75429