©Project proposal Created by Pencheva & Papazova

BULGARIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

INSTITUTE OF PSYCHOLOGY

UNIVERSAL AND CULTURALLY SPECIFIC

ASPECTS OF LEARNING STYLES:

AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE (Project proposal)

Eliana Pencheva & Eva Papazova

Sofia

2007

2

C O N T E N T S

AN ANALYSIS OF THE STATE OF RESEARCH ON THIS ISSUE 3

PREVIOUS STUDIES 7

OBJECTIVES, HYPOTHESES, APPROACH 7

METHODOLOGY, RESEARCH TECHIQUES, DATA PROCESSING,

ANALYSES 8

RESEARCH PLAN 9

EXPECTED RESULTS FROM THE RESEARCH ACTIVITY 9

LITERATURE 10

3

AN ANALYSIS OF THE STATE OF RESEARCH ON THIS ISSUE

The postmodern world is characterized by complexity, dynamism, globalization, and

pluralism and therefore calls for new kinds of competence and work environment. The

emphasis on information technologies, social skills, life-long education and learning has come

to the fore and this necessitates that the objectives, contents, and structure of Bulgarian

education be respectively redefined.

The modern interpretation of learning as an active process of individual construction

and reconstruction of knowledge, competence, values, and attitudes by means of dynamic

interactions within the educational context underlies the shift of focus from the subject matter

of teaching to the learners themselves. The world-wide modernization of educational policies

is aiming to achieve a genuine unity between the academic and personal development of

young people on a global scale. Their individual needs attract the serious interest researchers,

who impart special significance to the learning style seen as a personal construct.

Learning style. Specialized literature traditionally makes a distinction between style

and abilities. Thus style has been defined as “stable individual distinctions in the way or form

of psychic functioning” (Messick, 2001, cited by Roodenburg, 2003). This is the framework

in which learning style in most general terms is conceived as a characteristic individual

manner of perceiving and processing information (McClanaghan, 2000, Pozharliev, 2001,

2004). Semantically, learning style is closest to the term “cognitive style”. The prevailing

opinions are that learning style is a broad notion including the various styles of learning, the

cognitive styles, the personal styles and typologies such as the one associated with Karl

Jung’s model. Certain authors even assume that terms such as “learning styles”, “cognitive

styles”, “personal styles”, and “typologies” should be conceived as synonymous (Lemire,

2002).

There are numerous and varied theoretical studies on the essence and dimensions of

the “learning style” construct. The review of learning styles as a component of a relatively

stable personality type brings us to theories such as those of Apter, Jackson, Epstein and

Meier, Harrison and Branson, Miller, Jung, Myers, and Briggs, as well as the theory of Kolb.

Kolb’s questionnaire built upon his theory of learning as a cyclic process, which

consists of four major stages, has found a truly broad application. Research based on this

questionnaire shows that learning styles can serve as a predictor for certain types of behavior

in situations such as problem solving, choice of a profession and career, team work, conflict

4

resolution, communication, and can be used as a criterion for orienting learners to various

teaching options (Katz, 1988; Fox, 1984, cited by Pozharliev, 2002). The finding that what

can be established in result of the administration of the questionnaire is learning styles typical

for certain professional areas (Kolb, 1976, 1984, cited by Pozharliev, 2004) merits special

attention.

As far as modern research is concerned, the three-ply bulbous model (or the so-called

“onion model”) suggested by Curry contains the largest heuristic potential. The external layer

contains the teaching preferences, which are the most unstable; the intermediate layer includes

the style of processing data and information and is characterized by a higher degree of

stability. The author of this model identifies the internal layer as the cognitive personal style,

which is an individual approach to adapting and assimilating information and is a relatively

constant personal dimension. As one of the instruments measuring this aspect of learning style

she outlines the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator or МВТІ for short (Curry, 1993, cited by

Riding, 1997), based on the psychological type theory elaborated by Jung, Myers, and Briggs

(Jung, 1995, Myers et al., 1998).

The psychological type theory of Jung, Myers, and Briggs. In its contemporary

form this theory includes four constitutionally based bi-polar dimensions defined in terms of

attitudes and functions. The Extraversion (E) attitude is connected with a preference for

interaction with people and events in the external world, while the Introversion (I) attitude is

related to the internal world of concepts and ideas. The Sensing (S) function underlies the

interest for perceiving what is real, practical, and within reach by means of the senses, while

the Intuition (N) function underlies the perception of future opportunities, implicit meanings,

and theoretical models, which become reachable by means of insight. The Thinking (T)

function underlies a decision-making process based on a logical analysis of the causal type,

whereas the Feeling (F) function underlies a decision-making process based on the

importance of feelings for the human factor and the subjective value of alternatives. The

preference for the Judging (J) attitude is characterized by a tendency for an organized,

planned and structured way of life, while the preference for the Perceiving (P) attitude is

characterized by a tendency for a life style, which is flexible, adaptable, and open to changes.

There is a rich empirical material testifying to the fact that learning styles can be

organized in several ways within the above paradigm:

5

By the four basic dimensions of the type theory, e.g.: E-I (Extraversion -

Introversion), S-N (Sensing – Intuition), T-F (Thinking – Feeling), J-P (Judging

- Perceiving);

By combinations of functions, e.g.: S-T (Sensing – Thinking), S-F (Sensing –

Feeling), N-F (Intuition – Feeling), N-T (Intuition – Thinking);

By combinations of functions and attitudes, e.g.: S-P (Sensing – Perceiving), S-J

(Sensing – Judging), N-J (Intuition – Judging).

Undoubtedly, here we can find one of the advantages of this methodology, which lies

precisely in the variety of typological combinations that can be linked to learning styles and

the way in which skills, knowledge, values, and attitudes are mastered and internalized

(Lawrence, 1995; Keirsey and Bates, 1984).

Cross-cultural comparisons. Jung’s theory of psychological types places a special

emphasis on the understanding that psychological type patterns are a universal component of

human nature. The authors who conduct surveys from a cross-cultural point of view based on

the MBTI debate the relationship between “universality” and “cultural specificity”. The

results obtained in all countries around the world where the questionnaire has been introduced

prove that people of various nationalities possess all 16 types (Casas, 1996; Moody, 1993;

Fraser & Beekman, 1998; Todd & Robinson, 1998; Oxford & Nuby, 1998).

On the other hand, sufficient data have been compiled about the impact of the cultural

factor as well. They indicate that the distribution of the psychological types in each individual

culture is marked by a different proportion. What is observed is the presence of a prevailing

(modal) type, which is influenced by the dominant (national) culture in each country

throughout the world and this modal type is precisely the one most frequently encountered

within the boundaries of a given nationality. Thus for instance, the type most frequently

encountered in the United State of America is ESTJ (Myers et al., 1998), while in Asian

countries such as China, Korea, and Japan, the modal type is ISTJ (Horikoshi, 1996; Moody,

1993; Park, 1996).

Differences in the distribution of type preferences in various cultures can also be

observed in the level of paired dimensions. Casas has established preferences for the

following paired combinations in four different cultures: ES and EF in the United States of

America, NF and NT in the English-speaking parts of Canada, IT in the French-speaking parts

of Canada, and TP in France (Casas, 1996). Data obtained in the Czech Republic and

6

Slovakia also confirm the hypothesis about the presence of a culturally-bound type. The

respondents from these two countries indicate a significant preference for the TP (Thinking –

Perceiving) pair, much like the French but unlike the Americans. Besides, the preliminary

analysis of data compiled in Greece indicates that what is observed in this country is a

prevailing preference for the EN (Casas, 1998).

These observations confirm the opinion that MBTI is an instrument unaffected by the

cultural, racial, sexual, ethnic, religious or political belonging (Myers et al., 1998; Kendall,

2004).

The idea about the different cognitive approaches of each individual culture or group

of cultures expressed by a given institution (philosophy, science, education, social values,

etc.) also merits special attention. From this point of view it can be assumed that a culture,

which appreciates “action-oriented realists”, such as the culture in the USA, would show

preference for ES types (Casas, 1996; 1998). Upon interpreting such results, a special

attention is paid to the fact that the various types are expressed in different ways in the rich

variety of cultures. This is due to the traditions, values, and customs, which determine and

modify the preferences and the socially acceptable way of manifesting the constitutional

characteristics of an individual in each of these cultures (Myers et al., 1998). In other words,

national culture can be regarded as a factor, which determines the scope of admissible

behaviors in a given area. Thus, in some of the less expressive cultures, such as the culture of

the United Kingdom for instance, an introvert from Italy may look like an extrovert (Kendall,

2004).

Oxford and Nuby quote a number of surveys, which indicate that individuals from the

same culture manifest an inclination for a common pattern of learning and perception upon

comparison with members of another culture (Oxford & Nuby, 1998). The above-mentioned

authors have verified this trend by having conducted a MBTI survey of high school students

from several different cultures: American Indians, Afro-Americans, white Americans, and

Russians. The survey has revealed significant differences among the respondents. The results

obtained indicate that there are significant differences in the learning styles of the various

cultural groups.

7

PREVIOUS STUDIES

To a certain extent the subject matter connected with learning styles is present in a

large number of Bulgarian studies held within the conceptual framework of psychological

types, which was elaborated by Karl Jung and extended and made operational by I. Myers and

C. Briggs. In some of them learning styles are interpreted as a component of the hierarchical

organization of the personality (Pencheva et al. 2003, 2004; Christova et al., (in press);

Pencheva et al. (in press); Pencheva and Papazova, (in press)), while other studies clarify

learning styles in terms of their essence and specific manifestations within the educational

context. What is impressive about Bulgarian teachers in comparison with their US colleagues

and other Bulgarians practicing non-teaching disciplines is that they show a stronger affinity

for accepting facts and making decisions based on objective logical analysis on the one hand,

and for structure and control, on the other (Pencheva, 2006). This predisposition underlies the

discrepancy between the teaching style of teachers and lecturers and the cognitive orientations

of students in Bulgarian schools (Pencheva and Papazova, 2006).

The suggested subject of research is directly linked to the survey made with 1120

Bulgarian and Macedonian high-school and university students, which shows that

Macedonian respondents differ from their Bulgarian counterparts with stronger preference for

Sensing (S), Thinking (T), and Judging (J). This inclination corresponds to the needs for a

structured educational environment and factual material based on logic and analysis

(Pencheva et al. (in print)).

OBJECTIVES, HYPOTHESES, APPROACH

The analyzed international and Bulgarian studies gave rise to the following questions:

How does the Bulgarian learning pattern correspond with the learning patterns of other

cultures? How do geographic locations and the nature of the educational system impact

learning patterns? The answer to these questions may prove conducive to finding

psychological mechanisms for improving the quality of Bulgarian education and its more

adequate integration within contemporary European and world practices, preserving at the

same time its national specificity and traditions.

The attempt to answer the above questions formulated the major OBJECTIVE of the

suggested project, namely: To conduct a comparative analysis of the learning styles of

students from three different cultures: Bulgaria and Macedonia (in their capacity of Balkan

8

states, which have inherited a centralized and authoritarian educational system) on the one

hand, and the USA (in its capacity of a country representing another continent and a well-

established democratic educational system), on the other.

HYPOTHESES In compliance with Jung’s idea about the universal nature of psychological types, all

cognitive styles will be represented by the respondents from the three nationalities

subject to this study, but these styles will be registered in different proportions (Casas,

1996, 1998).

Common tendencies will be established for all cultures subject to this study depending

on the academic field, in which the respondents have been enrolled. The students who

have chosen to study the humanities will be likely to manifest a stronger inclination

for the Intuition-Feeling (NF) learning style, while students enrolled in the disciplines

of business and technology will tend to reveal a learning pattern strongly marked by

Sensing and Thinking (ST) (Pencheva, 2006; Myers et al., 1998).

Common tendencies will be established on the basis of gender as well: the male

respondents will reveal a stronger tendency for a field-independent learning style,

while the female respondents will tend to manifest a field-dependent learning style

(Pencheva, 2006; Myers et al., 1998).

The students from Bulgaria and Macedonia will differ from their US counterparts with

a marked preference for facts, logical analysis, and structured teaching approaches

under the impact of the centralized nature of the educational systems, which until

recently has been dominant in these countries. This trend is likely to be more distinct

in the Macedonian sample of respondents (Pencheva et al., in print).

METHODOLOGY, RESEARCH TECHNIQUES, DATA PROCESSING, ANALYSES The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (МBTI), form G, adapted for Bulgaria by E.

Pencheva (Pencheva and Kazandjiev, 2001), was the preferred choice for a method of

research for two major reasons. The first one is that among all existing questionnaires

designed to study learning styles it produces the most complete and multi-faceted profile

(Filbeck and Smith,1996), and the second one is that it has been defined as a culturally and

9

racially neutral instrument (Kendall, 2004). The questionnaire has been constructed by C.

Briggs and I. Myers to the purpose of making operational the type theory created by K. Jung.

The questionnaire identifies four constitutionally predetermined preferences organized in two

dichotonomous pairs of attitudes and two dichotonomous pairs of functions, which reflect

various aspects of the learning style. It consists of 126 items, which contain statements and

word pairs marking the two poles of the preferred dimension.

SAMPLE A total of 600 students will be subject to the suggested survey. The sample of

respondents will be balanced in terms of gender and will encompass 200 students from each

of the three countries: Bulgaria, Macedonia, and the USA.

The empirical data will be processed by the original software package elaborated by

the Center for Applications of Psychological Types called Self-Selection Ratio Type Table

(SRTT) (Granade and Briggs-Myers, 1987).

RESEARCH PLAN

1. Survey on the literature published on the subject matter in the form of a review article.

2. МВТІ pilot study of 600 students from three different nationalities.

3. Primary processing of the pilot study data.

4. Statistical processing of the data obtained by means of the Self-Selection Ratio Type

Table (SRTT).

5. A comparative analysis of the data thus compiled from the point of view of the “culture

dependence” factor.

6. Interpretation of results. Conclusions and summary presented in the form of an article.

EXPECTED RESULTS FROM THE RESEARCH ACTIVITY

The results of the study will reveal the distribution of learning styles for each of the

cultures subject to the study and will outline the most typical needs of students in this respect

stemming from their natural predispositions. Alongside the dominant profiles of students from

the three cultures, the less well represented and possibly the missing profiles will be analyzed

as well, which will make it clear what learning needs are tolerated and what needs the

10

respective educational system fails to meet and thus leaves uncovered. The clarification of

individual differences with respect to learning in the light of the type theory will facilitate the

constructive utilization of differences both in the didactic and the broader social context.

In this sense, the research results may find direct application in university teaching

practices by means of elaborating an overall system of psychological support for the

government policy directed at the modernization of education. It will be mainly oriented

towards the formation of attitudes and competencies for learning throughout the entire human

life cycle and towards the actualization of the entire creative potential of young people. It will

contain concrete measures for a more adequate rationalization of the teaching/learning

environment and the contents and technology of teaching with a view to the actual needs of

young people. These measures will also contribute to the development of a greater variety of

learning styles by means of improving and enriching the teaching styles themselves.

The longer-range objectives of the project will be to seek ways and means for the

globalization of educational practice and approaches on a world-wide scale.

LITERATURE

Pencheva, E. (2006). Psychological typology and educational practice. Sofia “Prof.

Marin Drinov” Academic Publishing House, p.195. (In Bulgarian).

Pencheva, Е., Bozhinova, R., Vasileva, S., Boyanova, D. (2004). Personality,

cognitive style and decision making. Psychological investigations, 2, 81 – 96.(In Bulgarian)

Pencheva, Е. & Vasileva, S. (2004).Relationship between creativity style and level.

Psychological investigations, 3, 47 – 62.(In Bulgarian)

Pencheva, E. & Papazova, E.(2006). Personality typology in Bulgarian school –

comparative analysis. Psychological Investigations, 1, 23-37. (in Bulgarian).

Pencheva, Е., Bozhinova, R., Vasileva, S., Boyanova, D.(2003). The influence of

psychological type on cognitive style and decision making style. Journal of the Bulgarian

academy of sciences, 2 , 27 – 32.(In Bulgarian)

Pencheva, E., Papazova, E., Kochankovski, S. Cross-cultural differences in the

personal types of pupils and students from Bulgaria and Macedonia. Journal of the Bulgarian

academy of sciences (in press), (in Bulgarian)

11

Pozharliev, А. (2001). Learning styles and educational and professional specialization.

Bulgarian Journal of Psychology,1-2, 145-173, (in Bulgarian)

Pozharliev, А. (2002). Approbation of David Kolb’s methodology for the assessment

of individual learning styles. Psychological Investigations, 1, 7-18, (in Bulgarian)

Pozharliev, А. (2004). Assessment of learning skills and learning styles in the process

of training managers. Psychological Studies, vol. 1, pp. 81-100, (in Bulgarian)

Christova – Slavcheva, E., Papazova, E., Pencheva, E. Cognitive style and

psychological type. Annual of SU “St. Kliment Ohridski”, Department of Philosophy, (in

press), (in Bulgarian)

Jung, C. (1995). Psychological types. Sofia, University publishing house “St. Kl.

Ohridsky”, (in Bulgarian).

Casas, E. (1996). Interpreting cultural differences with the MBTI: possibilities and

limitations. -In: Psychological type and culture - east and west: A multicultural research

symposium. University of Hawai’i at Manoa, January, 5-7, 77-79.

Casas, E. (1998). Interpreting cultural differences with the MBTI: Possibilities and

limitations. In: R. A. Moody (Ed.), Proceedings of the Second Multicultural Research

Symposium of the Center for Applications of Psychological Type (pp. 77- 79).

University of Hawaii, January 1996. Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of

Psychological Type.

Filbeck, G. & Smith, L. (1996).Learning styles, teaching strategies and predictors of

success for students in Corporate Finance. Financial Practice and Education, spring/summer,

74 – 85.

Fraser, St. & C. Beekman. (1998). Introducing teaching & learning styles on the

Navajo reservation. -In: Counter attack: rising to the challenges to education. The role of

psychological type. Orlando, 175-182.

Granade, G. & Briggs-Myers, I.(1987). Selection ratio type table PC software.

Gainesville, Center for Applications of Psychological Type.

Horikoshi, W.C. (1996). Cross-cultural conflict of asians in the U.S.: application of

MBTI in a multicultural environment. -In: Psychological type and culture - East & West: A

multicultural research symposium, January 5-7, 29-43, 1996.

Keirsy, D. & Bates, M. (1984).Please understand me. (5 th ed.).Del Mar:

CA:Prometheus Nemesis.

12

Kendall, B. (2004). Fish out of water: Using the MBTI instrument in different

cultures. Australian Psychological Type Review, 6(1), 3-11.

Lawrence, G. (1995). People types and tiger stripes. Gainesville, Center for

Application of Psychological Type.

Lemire, D. (2002). Brief report: what developmental educators should know about

learning styles and cognitive styles? Journal of College Reading and Learning, Vol. 32, Issue

2, 177 – 180.

McClanaghan, M.E. (2000). A strategy for helping students learn how to learn.

Education, Vol.120, №3, 479-486.

Moody, R. (1993). Psychological type and ethnicity: how do ethnographic and type

descriptions compare? -In: Psychological type and culture – east & west:: A multicultural

research symposium, January 6-8, 157-191.

Myers, I., McCaulley M., Quenk, N., Hammer, A. (1998). MBTI manual . A guide to

the development and use of the Myers-Briggs type indicator, third edition, Palo Alto,

Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.

Oxford, R. & J. Nuby. (1998). Cross-cultural comparisons of psychological type:

students of native american, african american, mexican american, caucasian american, and

russian backgrounds. Psychological Type and Culture – East & West: A Multicultural

Research Conference, January 9-11

Park, J. (1996). The universality of the MBTI, cultural ideal types and falsification

issues in Korea. -In: Psychological type and culture - east and west: A multicultural research

symposium, January 5-7, 15-28.

Pencheva, E. & Kazandjiev, R. (2001). Bulgarian translation of MBTI materials:

problems and solutions. In: Psychological type and culture – East &West: a multicultural

research conference. Program and Proceedings, Gainesville, Center for Applications of

Psychological type, 73 – 79.

Pencheva, E. & Papazova, E. Cognitive style and Values. Psychological Type and

Culture – East & West: A Multicultural Research Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, January 6-8,

2006 (in press).

Pencheva,E. , Vassileva, S. Bozhinova, R. Psychological Type and Regulation of the

Individual Behavior. In:Psychological Type and Culture – East & West: A Multicultural

Research Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, January 6-8, 2006 (in press).

13

Riding, R. (1997). On the nature of cognitive style. Educational Psychology, Vol. 17

Issue 1/2, p29 – 50.

Roodenburg, J. (2003). Cognitive Style: A Psycholexically - Derived Personality-

Centered Model. European .Journal of Personality. 17, 119-141.

Todd, M. & D. Robinson (1998). Students of color at an urban community college. -

In: Counter Attack: rising to the challenges to education. The role of psychological type,

Orlando, Florida, March 5-8, 199-207.