Comparison of personality types and learning styles of engineering students, agricultural systems management students, and faculty in an Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department

A. P. Zimmerman, R. G. Johnson, Tracy Scheidt Hoover, J. W. Hilton, Paul Heinz Heinemann, D. R. Buckmaster

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study investigated differences in learning styles and personality types among engineering students, agricultural systems management students, and faculty in the Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at Pennsylvania State University. Learning styles and personality types were evaluated using the Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT) and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), respectively. Mean values for the GEFT for all three groups indicated a strong preference for the field-independent learning style. There were no significant differences in MBTI type preferences between engineering students and faculty. However, the agricultural systems management students differed significantly (p < 0.05) from faculty in their preference for Perceiving and from engineering students in their preference for Sensing. Results of the study are useful in helping faculty better understand and improve the teaching and learning process involving the two groups of students.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)311-317
Number of pages7
JournalTransactions of the ASABE
Volume49
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 1 2006

Fingerprint

Agricultural engineering
bioengineering
Bioengineering
agricultural engineering
farming system
Personality
engineering
students
learning
student
Learning
Students
Personality Inventory
teaching
comparison
biological engineering
Teaching
testing

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Forestry
  • Food Science
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Agronomy and Crop Science
  • Soil Science

Cite this

@article{9811410711ee4a888a5f20eb5c41a892,
title = "Comparison of personality types and learning styles of engineering students, agricultural systems management students, and faculty in an Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department",
abstract = "This study investigated differences in learning styles and personality types among engineering students, agricultural systems management students, and faculty in the Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at Pennsylvania State University. Learning styles and personality types were evaluated using the Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT) and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), respectively. Mean values for the GEFT for all three groups indicated a strong preference for the field-independent learning style. There were no significant differences in MBTI type preferences between engineering students and faculty. However, the agricultural systems management students differed significantly (p < 0.05) from faculty in their preference for Perceiving and from engineering students in their preference for Sensing. Results of the study are useful in helping faculty better understand and improve the teaching and learning process involving the two groups of students.",
author = "Zimmerman, {A. P.} and Johnson, {R. G.} and Hoover, {Tracy Scheidt} and Hilton, {J. W.} and Heinemann, {Paul Heinz} and Buckmaster, {D. R.}",
year = "2006",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "49",
pages = "311--317",
journal = "Transactions of the ASABE",
issn = "2151-0032",
publisher = "American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of personality types and learning styles of engineering students, agricultural systems management students, and faculty in an Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department

AU - Zimmerman, A. P.

AU - Johnson, R. G.

AU - Hoover, Tracy Scheidt

AU - Hilton, J. W.

AU - Heinemann, Paul Heinz

AU - Buckmaster, D. R.

PY - 2006/1/1

Y1 - 2006/1/1

N2 - This study investigated differences in learning styles and personality types among engineering students, agricultural systems management students, and faculty in the Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at Pennsylvania State University. Learning styles and personality types were evaluated using the Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT) and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), respectively. Mean values for the GEFT for all three groups indicated a strong preference for the field-independent learning style. There were no significant differences in MBTI type preferences between engineering students and faculty. However, the agricultural systems management students differed significantly (p < 0.05) from faculty in their preference for Perceiving and from engineering students in their preference for Sensing. Results of the study are useful in helping faculty better understand and improve the teaching and learning process involving the two groups of students.

AB - This study investigated differences in learning styles and personality types among engineering students, agricultural systems management students, and faculty in the Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at Pennsylvania State University. Learning styles and personality types were evaluated using the Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT) and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), respectively. Mean values for the GEFT for all three groups indicated a strong preference for the field-independent learning style. There were no significant differences in MBTI type preferences between engineering students and faculty. However, the agricultural systems management students differed significantly (p < 0.05) from faculty in their preference for Perceiving and from engineering students in their preference for Sensing. Results of the study are useful in helping faculty better understand and improve the teaching and learning process involving the two groups of students.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33645459921&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33645459921&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:33645459921

VL - 49

SP - 311

EP - 317

JO - Transactions of the ASABE

JF - Transactions of the ASABE

SN - 2151-0032

IS - 1

ER -