Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An individual difference perspective on student diversity

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the relationships among various aspects of learning styles/strategies and personality dimensions to arrive at a “thicker” description of individual differences in functioning in general and in the school context in particular. An exploratory factor analysis of the subscales of the Inventory of Learning Processes-Revised and the NEO-Personality Inventory provided evidence for convergent and discriminant validity of six higher-order common factors. Hierarchical regression analyses were performed to differentially predict ILP-R subscales from NEO-PI subscales. The analyses were conducted separately for students identified as having high versus low academic self-esteem. The results support previous findings that self-concept variables strongly moderate relationships among personality and learning style dimensions. We discuss how the cross-fertilization between personality and learning theory and research enables us to better define what individual differences in learning consist of, how they originate, how they are manifested, what furthers or hinders their expression, and finally, to what extent they are amenable to change (maturation, development, training). Implications for school achievement, cognitive development and the productive use of individual differences in educational practice are discussed with regard to different types of learners.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerman, P.L., Sternberg, R.J., & Glaser, R. (eds.) (1989). Learning and individual differences: Advances in theory and research. New York: W.H. Freeman & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1990). ‘Conclusion: Reflections on non-ability determinants of competence’, in Sternberg, R.J. & Kolligan, J. (eds.), Competence considered. pp. 212–242. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1993). ‘Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning’, Educational Psychologist 28: 117–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). ‘The moderator/mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51: 1173–1182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaty, E., Dall'Alba, G., & Marton, F. (1990). Conceptions of Learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 13: 12–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. (1993). ‘What do inventories of students learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification’, British Journal of Educational Psychology 63: 3–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M. (1994). ‘The interface between intelligence and personality as determinants of classroom learning’, in Saklofske, D.H., & Zeidner, M. (eds.), Handbook of personality and intelligence. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M. (1993). ‘Being concerned with well-being and with learning’, Educational Psychologist 28: 149–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borkenau, P., & Ostendorf, F. (1990). ‘Comparing exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: A study on the 5-factor-model of personality’, Personality and Individual Differences 11: 515–524.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, S.R. (1989). ‘The optimum level of measurement for personality constructs’, in Buss, D.M., & Cantor, N. (eds.), Personality psychology: Recent trends and emerging directions. pp. 246–260. New York: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryne, B.M. (1984). ‘The general/academic self-concept nomological network: A review of construct validation research’, Review of Educational Research 54: 427–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J.D., & Lavallee, L.F. (1993). ‘Who am I? The role of self-concept confusion in understanding the behavior of people with low self-esteem’, in Baumeister, R.F. (ed.), Self-esteem: The puzzle of low self-regard. pp. 3–20. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cervone, D. (1991). ‘Two disciplines in personality psychology’, Psychological Science 2: 371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, J.W. (1988). ‘Learning disabled children's self-concept’, Review of Educational Research 58: 347–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheek, J.M. (1989). Identity orientations and self-interpretations. In D.M. Buss & N. Cantor (Eds.), Personality Research for the 90's, New York: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheek, J.M. & Hogan, R. (1983). Self-concepts, self-presentations, and moral judgements. In J. Suls & A.G. Greenwald (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on the selfu (pp. 249–273). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence, Erlbaum, and Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P.T., & McCrae, R.R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory manual. Odessa, Fl: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P.T., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). ‘Four ways five factors are basic’, Personality and Individual Differences 13: 653–665.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P.T., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, Fl: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curry, L. (1983). ‘An organisation of learning styles theory and constructs’, ERIC Document 235: 185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Digman, J.M. (1990). ‘Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model’, Annual Review of Psychology 41: 417–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A., & Fouts, J. (1991). Research on Educational Innovations. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, R. (1987). ‘A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities’, in Baron, J.S.R.E. (ed.), Teacher thinking skills: Theory and practice. pp. 9–26. New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N. (1991). ‘Approaches to learning and perceptions of the learning environment’, Higher Education 22: 201–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle, N.J. (1988). ‘Motivational factors in students' approaches to learning’, in Schmeck, R.R. (ed.), Learning styles and learning strategies, pp. 21–52. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, H.J. (1992). ‘Four ways five factors are not basic’, Personality and Individual Differences 13: 667–673.

    Google Scholar 

  • Facione, P.A., Sanchez, C.A., Facione, N.C., & Gainen, J. (1994). The disposition toward critical thinking. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

  • Furnham, A. (1992). ‘Personality ad learning style: A study of three instruments’, Personality and Individual Differences 13: 429–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geisler-Brenstein, E., & Schmeck, R.R. (1996). ‘The revised inventory of learning processes: A multifaceted perspective on individual differences in learning’, in Birenbaum, M., & Dochy, F. J.R.C. (eds.), Alternatives in assessment of achievements, learning processes and prior knowledge - a European perspective.

  • Geisler-Bernstein, E., Schmeck, R.R., & Hetherington, J. (1995). Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Revised Inventory of Learning Processes. Unpublished Manuscript, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorrell, J.R. (1990). ‘Some contributions of self-efficacy research to self-concept theory’, Journal of Research and Development in Education 23: 73–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorsuch, R.L. (1989). Factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • John, O.P. (1989). Toward a taxonomy of personality descriptors, in D.M. Buss & N. Cantor (Eds.), Personality Psychology: Recent trends and emerging directions (pp. 261–277). New York: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D.A. (1994). New scoring method addresses MBTI criticism. Bulletin of Psychological Type 17: 20–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D.H., & Grabowski, B.L. (1993). Handbook of individual differences, learning, and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kernis, M.H., Brockner, J., & Frankel, B.S. (1989). ‘Self-esteem and reactions to failure: The mediating role of overgeneralization’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57: 707–714.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krauskopf, C.J., & Saunders, D.R. (1994). Personality and ability. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maqsud, M. (1993). ‘Relationships of some personality variables to academic attainment of secondary school pupils’, Educational Psychology 13: 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H.W. (1990). ‘Causal ordering of academic self-concept and academic achievement: A multiwave, longitudinal panel analysis’, Journal of Educational Psychology 82: 646–656.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H.W. (1992). ‘Content specificity of relations between academic achievement and academic self-concept’, Journal of Educational Psychology 84: 5–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H.W., Bryne, B.M., & Shavelson, R. (1988). A multifaceted academic self-concept: Its hierarchical structure and its relation to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology 80: 366–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R.R., & Costa, P.T. (1989). ‘Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator from the perspective of the five-factor model of personality’, Journal of Personality 57: 17–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R.R., & Costa, P.T. (1990). Personality in adulthood. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R.R., & Costa, P.T. (1994). ‘The stability of personality: Observations and evaluations’, Current Directions in Psychological Science 3: 173–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. (1984). ‘The nature of cogitive styles: Problems and promise in educational practice’, Educational Psychologist 19: 59–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. (1994). ‘The matter of style: Manifestations of personality in cognition, learning, and teaching’, Educational Psychologist 29: 121–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, A. (1991). ‘Personality types, learning styles, and educational goals’, Educational Psychology 11: 217–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, A. (1988). ‘Toward a typology of personality styles’, Canadian Psychology 29: 263–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montag, I., & Levin, J. (1994). ‘The five factor model and psychopathology in nonclinical samples’, Personality and Individual Differences 17: 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Pask, G. (1976). ‘Styles and strategies of learning’, British Journal of Educational Psychology 46: 128–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedhazur, E.J. (1982). Multiple regression in behavioral research: Explanation and prediction. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, R., Jay, F., & Tishman, P. (1993). ‘Beyond abilities: A dispositional theory of thinking’, Merrill Palmer Quarterly 39: 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rytting, M., Ware, R., & Prince, R.A. (1994). Bimodal distributions in a sample of CEOs: Validating evidence for the MBTI. Journal of Psychological Type 31: 16–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmeck, R.R., Ribich, F., & Ramanaiah, N. (1977). ‘Development of a self-report inventory for using individual differences in learning processes’, Applied Psychological Measurement 1: 413–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmeck, R.R., Geisler-Brenstein, E., & Cercy, S.P. (1991). ‘Self-concept and learning: The revised inventory of learning processes’, Educational Psychology 11: 343–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmeck, R.R., & Geisler-Brenstein, E. (1995). The Revised Inventory of Learning Processes Manual. Carbondale, IL: Individuation Technologies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R.J., & Martin, M. (1988). ‘When teaching thinking does not work, what goes wrong?’ Teachers College Record 89: 555–577.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R., & Ruzgis, P. (eds.), (1994). Personality and intelligence. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R.J. (1994). ‘PRSVL: an integrative framework for understanding mind in context’, in Sternberg, R.J., & Wagner, R.K. (eds.), Mind in Context. pp. 218–232. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strube, G. (1990). ‘Explaining children's problem solving: Current trends’, in Schneider, W., & Weinert, F.E. (eds.), Interactions Among Aptitudes, Strategies, And Knowledge in Cognitive Performance, pp. 90–95. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tellegen, A., Lykken, D.T., Bouchard, T.J., Wilcox, K.J., Segal, N.L., & Rich, S. (1988). ‘Personality similarity in twins reared apart and together’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54: 1031–1039.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrance, P., & Rockenstein, Z. (1988). ‘Styles of thinking and creativity’, in Schmeck, R.R. (ed.), Learning strategies and learning styles. pp. 275–290. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuckman, B.W., & Sexton, T.L. (1992). ‘Self-believers are self-motivated; self-doubters are not’, Personality and Individual Differences 13: 425–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakefield, J.C. (1989). ‘Levels of explanation in personality theory’, in Buss, D.M., & Cantor, N. (eds.), Personality psychology: Recent trends and emerging directions. New York: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wylie, R. (1979). The self-concept: Theory and research on selected topics. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 62903, Carbondale, IL, USA

    E. Geisler-Brenstein, R. R. Schmeck & J. Hetherington

Authors
  1. E. Geisler-Brenstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. R. Schmeck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Hetherington
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Geisler-Brenstein, E., Schmeck, R.R. & Hetherington, J. An individual difference perspective on student diversity. High Educ 31, 73–96 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00129108

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00129108

Keywords

Search

Navigation