Job Discussion Forums

[nomad soul]

I recently received a PM from a TEFL newbie who asked if being an extrovert was a plus in terms of effective teaching. He was putting his CV and cover letter together and wanted to indicate that he's an extrovert because "that's the type of teacher employers want." I suggested other ways to describe his personality, but he was insistent on using "extrovert." Anyhoo...

What's your take on introversion and extroversion in relation to being an EFL teacher? Which is better for TEFL, if it matters at all? What about different cultural perceptions about these personality traits -- that some societies have a bias toward extroverts? What about ambiverts (in between an intro and an extro)? Where do you fit in?

Just some food for thought.

[schwa]

"Extrovert" might look good on an application in this field. Its certainly less generic-sounding than "outgoing."

Personally, I'm totally dual. In the classroom or other professional settings I can confidently run the show, but on my own time I'm an introspective near-hermit. I need that balance.

[Snuff]

Being extraverted helps in some parts of teaching, particularly with kids. If you want to work in an immersion programme for preschoolers, for instance, you need to have the energy and charisma to survive the day. It's definitely no place for the retiring type. I'm introverted, and I've found it difficult to keep up with the enthusiasm and energy. It doesn't come as naturally to me as it does to my extraverted colleague.

As for teaching adults, I've found it worked well for me in Japan. My students didn't find me threatening, and I had quite a high rate of student retention - whether this was due to my introversion, is another matter. In Prague, it doesn't really make a difference. Perhaps the lack of an edutainer's charisma makes me seem more professional? Meh.

The main reason being introverted in this field sucks is how the long hours of engaging with other people can drain your life force. Six hours of back-to-back privates (each lesson 40 minutes) was my idea of hell. At least in group classes, you have the chance to step back for a minute or two.

What I liked so much about the school I went for my Trinity Cert, was the diversity in personality types. The Course tutor even took the time to pair us off with a mentor who shared a similar personality to us. My mentor was the quiet, dry type, but he also had a gentle side to him. I guess it makes sense - students are diverse, so there isn't going to be a "one size fits all" personality type for a teacher; you can't be the perfect teacher for everyone.

Except for kids. Kids love jolly people.

[gregory999]

Harvard professor Brian Little is a specialist in personality psychology who also challenges the idea of teaching being dominated by extroverts. He says that introverts can act out of character when they teach (ie. act as an extrovert) out of professionalism, love, and passion for a subject. As a self-identified introvert and a beloved accomplished professor, Little thus challenges this stereotype of teaching as an extrovert’s domain in his talk entitled Confessions of a Passionate Introvert.

“Yet he pushes through the constraints of his temperament because the social value of lecturing and speaking–of truly connecting with his students–trumps the discomfort his introversion can cause him. Little calls this phenomenon Free Trait Theory: the idea that while we have certain fixed bits of personality, we can act out of character in the service of core personal goals. The key, he explains, is balancing three equal but very different identities. There’s our mostly inborn personality, the one that wants us to be introverted or extroverted; that’s the biogenic identity. There are the expectations of our culture, family and religion–the sociogenic identity. And then there are our personal desires and our sense of what matters–the ideogenic identity.”
http://sites.duke.edu/introvertedteachers/teaching-as-an-extroverted-profession/

[spiral78]

If the guy is applying for jobs in Asia and particularly with kiddies, extrovert is probably a plus. Otherwise, no.


I'd personally be highly suspicious of a candidate who blew his 'extrovert' trumpet at any stage of the job application process. Wouldn't be an asset in my context.

[MotherF]

I've met a few extremely introverted teachers who I've never seen in the classroom but who did leave me wondering, "How does this person teach?"

I'm not sure I'd say a CV stands out because it has the word extrovert on it though.

[johnslat]

I tend to be more introvered outside the classroom but very extroverted inside it.

Dr. Jekyll, meet Mr. Hyde.

Regards,

Well, one or the other.

[GreatApe]

I definitely don't see it as an "either / or" dynamic. It depends on the class, the students, the level and the topic/subject I'm teaching.

Within that context it also depends on the day. It's much more like a tool or a "switch" that I have/use as a teacher. Some days I have to use it, and some days I don't have to use it. When you're teaching a "boring" subject or unit in a classroom, a little extroversion can be a great thing. When the students are interested in the subject (or topic) than extroversion might just be a distraction and there's no need to be so excited or extroverted.

Jekyll and Hyde about sums it up, although others might call it (experience it as) "multiple personality disorder!" I do think it helps if teachers can "turn it on and off" like a light switch, although it shouldn't be (or be seen as) "phony." Students should experience it as genuine and sincere, and if a teacher loves and enjoys what he/she is doing, then I think it will come off that way more often than not.

I see it much the same way as I do the use of voice levels ... louder is NOT ALWAYS better to capture students' attention, sometimes a whisper can gain attention more quickly, for example. However, utilizing a range of voices works best, IMO.

CHEERS and KEEP GOING!

--GA

[Nano]

For me, surrendering to my introversion and true feelings has had more benefits than disadvantages. In my first year of teaching, I would often speak louder, more "outgoing" and enthusiastic. With this style, I could make students laugh a lot, get excited and have them like me as a teacher but to me it was too draining and unfulfilling. Making them laugh and entertained didn't do much for my own well-being and just felt like "another day at the office" and I was tired of being that way because eventually students realize that you are not the same person in class as outside.

I also started to get annoyed by my own lack of authenticity. I often thought to myself "you are such a tool". I don't want to maintain an image that I am this outgoing and enthusiastic person cause it is too much work. I eventually stopped and got the courage to talk in my normal calm voice and stopped trying to be funny/interesting. I stopped exaggerating my smiles and laughs and it actually made teaching a lot better. Students started to pay attention more to what I said and I developed better personal connections with students. It was way more fulfilling when students want to talk to the real me instead talking to me as their funny teacher. We still joke around but how I speak and feel is more true to me so it doesn't feel draining as it used to.

[natsume]

I'm also a Jekyl/Hyde type. I suspect my natural introversion may be an asset in working with students outside of class, particularly shy/introverted ones. I tend to "get" them, and I think they find me approachable.

[In the heat of the moment]

From Wiki; "The Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is an introspective self-report questionnaire designed to indicate psychological preferences in how people perceive the world and make decisions."

I think this is a more useful tool to indicate how teachers react in a classroom, as it allows for more or less lively classroom environments.

[johnslat]

Goodbye to MBTI, the Fad That Won’t Die

My name is Adam Grant, and I am an INTJ. That’s what I learned from a wildly popular personality test, which is taken by more than 2.5 million people a year, and used by 89 of the Fortune 100 companies. It’s called the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI (link is external)), and my score means that I’m more introverted than extraverted, intuiting than sensing, thinking than feeling, and judging than perceiving. As I reflected on the results, I experienced flashes of insight. Although I spend much of my time teaching and speaking on stage, I am more of an introvert—I’ve always preferred a good book to a wild party. And I have occasionally kept lists of my to-do lists.

But when I took the test a few months later, I was an ESFP. Suddenly, I had become the life of the party, the guy who follows his heart and throws caution to the wind. Had my personality changed, or is this test not all it’s cracked up to be? I began to read through the evidence, and I found that the MBTI is about as useful as a polygraph for detecting lies. One researcher even called it (link is external) an “act of irresponsible armchair philosophy.” When it comes to accuracy, if you put a horoscope on one end and a heart monitor on the other, the MBTI falls about halfway in between.

Now, if you’re an MBTI fan, you might say it’s typical of an INTJ to turn to science. Touche. But regardless of your type, it’s hard to argue with the idea that if we’re going to divide people into categories, those categories ought to be meaningful (link is external). In social science, we use four standards: are the categories reliable, valid, independent, and comprehensive? For the MBTI, the evidence says not very, no, no, and not really.

1. I’m Not Schizophrenic

A test is reliable if it produces the same results from different sources. If you think your leg is broken, you can be more confident when two different radiologists diagnose a fracture. In personality testing, reliability means getting consistent results over time, or similar scores when rated by multiple people who know me well. As my inconsistent scores foreshadowed, the MBTI does poorly on reliability. Research shows “that as many as three-quarters of test takers achieve a different personality type when tested again,” writes Annie Murphy Paul in The Cult of Personality Testing (link is external), “and the sixteen distinctive types described by the Myers-Briggs have no scientific basis whatsoever.” In a recent article (link is external), Roman Krznaric adds that “if you retake the test after only a five-week gap, there's around a 50% chance (link is external) that you will fall into a different personality category.”

2. Objects in This Mirror May Be Less Accurate Than They Appear

A test is valid if it predicts outcomes that matter. If we’re going to use it in organizations, it should shed light on how well I’ll perform in a particular job or with a certain group of people. Although there are data suggesting that different occupations attract people of different types, there is no convincing body of evidence that types affect job performance or team effectiveness. As management researchers William Gardner and Mark Martinko write in a comprehensive review (link is external), “Few consistent relationships between type and managerial effectiveness have been found.”

3. Apples and Oranges are Both Fruit, and So is a Tomato—But a Potato Isn’t

Categories are mutually exclusive if they capture different traits that are separate, and combine traits that have commonalities. Here, too, the MBTI misses the mark. Let me illustrate with two (of many) examples:

Exhibit A: in the MBTI, thinking and feeling are opposite poles of a continuum. In reality, they’re independent: we have three decades of evidence (link is external) that if you like ideas and data, you can also like people and emotions. (In fact, more often than not, they go hand in hand: research shows (link is external) that people with stronger thinking and reasoning skills are also better at recognizing, understanding, and managing emotions.) When I scored as a thinker one time and a feeler one time, it’s because I like both thinking and feeling. I should have separate scores for the two.
Exhibit B: the feeling type is supposed to tap into my orientation toward people and emotions. But this lumps together three separate traits (link is external) that capture a positive orientation toward others, the tendency to feel negative emotions, and the receptivity toward these emotions.
4. A Physical Exam That Ignores Your Torso and One of Your Arms

A comprehensive test assesses the major categories that exist. One of the key elements missing from the MBTI is what personality psychologists call emotional stability versus reactivity—the tendency to stay calm and collected under stress or pressure (link is external). This turns out to be one of the most important predictors (link is external) of individual and group patterns of thought, feeling, and action, so it’s an unfortunate oversight. As another example, the judging-perceiving scale captures whether I’m an organizer and a planner, but overlooks the industriousness and achievement drive that tend to accompany these characteristics—together, they form a personality trait called conscientiousness (link is external). As personality psychologists Robert McCrae and Paul Costa sum it up (link is external), “the MBTI does not give comprehensive information on the four domains it does sample.”

Even introversion-extraversion, the trait the MBTI captured best, is incomplete. According to the MBTI, extraversion is about where you get your energy: from the outside world or the inner world. This is partially right, but it’s not because of a preference for interacting with people. Our scores are heavily shaped by how our brains process neocortical arousal. As Susan Cain explains in Quiet (link is external), “more than a thousand studies conducted by scientists worldwide” suggest that introverts “are more sensitive than extroverts to various kinds of stimulation, from coffee to a loud bang to the dull roar of a networking event.” Besides, it turns out that like all personality traits, introversion-extraversion is shaped like a bell curve: it’s most common to be in the middle. The vast majority of us are ambiverts (link is external): in Dan Pink’s words from To Sell is Human (link is external), most people are“neither overly extraverted nor wildly introverted.”

Caught in a Bad Romance

Why does the MBTI remain so popular in spite of these problems? Murphy Paul argues (link is external) that people cling to the test for two major reasons. One is that thousands of people have invested time and money in becoming MBTI-certified trainers and coaches. As I wrote over the summer (link is external), it’s awfully hard to let go of our big commitments. The other is the “aha” moment that people experience when the test gives them insight about others—and especially themselves. “Those who love type,” Murphy Paul writes (link is external), “have been seduced by an image of their own ideal self.” Once that occurs, personality psychologist Brian Little says (link is external), raising doubts about “reliability and validity is like commenting on the tastiness of communion wine. Or how good a yarmulke is at protecting your head.”

Palm readings and horoscopes can spark insights too. That doesn’t mean we should talk about them in our work teams. As Little observes (link is external), “Insight from the Myers-Briggs can start that conversation, but unfortunately it often ends the conversation. You’ve got your type stamped on your forehead.”

In a Washington Post article, Does it pay to know your type? (link is external) Lillian Cunningham asks whether we can send the MBTI back to the factory for some refurbishing. The response from Little: “It’s a little bit like taking a Dodge Caravan and trying to turn it into a Rolls Royce.” Instead, psychologists have spent the past half century building a better car from scratch, using the scientific method. That car is called the Big Five personality traits (link is external), and it meets the standards above. Across many of the world’s cultures, five personality traits consistently emerge: extraversion, emotional stability, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness. The Big Five traits have high reliability and considerable power in predicting job performance (link is external) and team effectiveness (link is external). They even have genetic and biological bases (link is external), and researchers in the emerging field of personality neuroscience have begun mapping (link is external) the Big Five to relevant brain regions.

The Big Five are far from perfect, and there’s growing support (link is external) for a HEXACO model of personality (link is external) that adds a sixth trait: honesty-humility. Right now, though, the biggest problem facing the Big Five is one of marketing. Most people prefer to be called agreeable than disagreeable—we need to repackage this trait as supportive versus challenging. I hope some of you will take up the challenge.

Until then, we all need to recognize that four letters don’t do justice to anyone’s identity. So leaders, consultants, counselors, coaches, and teachers, join me in delivering this message:

MBTI, I’m breaking up with you. It’s not me. It’s you.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/give-and-take/201309/goodbye-mbti-the-fad-won-t-die

Regards,
John

[In the heat of the moment]

This is quite a good, in depth website;

http://thoughtcatalog.com/heidi-priebe/

[johnslat]

I prefer horoscopes.

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-28315137

Regards,
John

[buravirgil]

The joke I read on a forum that's devoted a lot of attention to the MBTI® was:
According to my horoscope, I shouldn't believe in this stuff.

Another: I've found the Myers-Briggs indicator to be useful in one specific way:
I am pretty sure I will not get along well with any individual or organization that takes it seriously.

_Uncovering the Secret History of Myers-Briggs__by Merve Emre_)Digg.com(

I had been told that MBTI certification was a prerequisite to accessing the personal papers of Isabel Briggs Myers, a woman about whom very little is known except that she designed the type indicator in the final days of World War II. Part of our collective ignorance about Myers stems from how profoundly her personal history has been eclipsed by her creation, in much the same way that the name "Frankenstein" has come to stand in for the monster and not his creator.

Flip through the New York Times or Wall Street Journal, and you will find the indicator used to debate what makes an employee a good "fit" for her job, or to determine the leadership styles of presidential candidates. Open a browser, and you will find the indicator adapted for addictive pop psychology quizzes by BuzzFeed and Thought Catalog. Enroll in college, work an office job, enlist in the military, join the clergy, fill out an online dating profile, and you will encounter the type indicator in one guise or another — to match a person to her ideal office job or to her ideal romantic partner.

Yet though her creation is everywhere, Myers and the details of her life's work are curiously absent from the public record. Not a single independent biography is in print today. Not one article details how Myers, an award-winning mystery writer who possessed no formal training in psychology or sociology, concocted a test routinely deployed by 89 of the Fortune 100 companies, the US government, hundreds of universities, and online dating sites like Perfect Match, Project Evolove and Type Tango. And not one expert in the field of psychometric testing, a $500 million industry with over 2,500 different tests on offer in the US alone, can explain why Myers-Briggs has so thoroughly surpassed its competition, emerging as a household name on par with the Atkins Diet or The Secret.

Presenting evidence in support of its use has yet to be achieved that I can cite. As a teacher, the empirical method is important to me.