EXTROVERSION/INTROVERSION SYLWIA GRABIEC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

By studying the differences between extroverts and introverts teachers can predict what kind of activities students will enjoy, what sort of teaching methods they require and what their learning styles are. Burruss and Kaenzig (1999) claim that extroverts and introverts need different kinds of instruction. Introverts prefer to work on their own than in groups, they do not like being in the centre of attention and need time and space to complete the tasks. Many of these students enjoy lectures and deductive methods of teaching. They think carefully before speaking, do not like sharing their inner thoughts with others unless they know them well and they prefer writing than speaking that makes oral skills more difficult to acquire. The strategies used in the classroom should include: small group interaction, relaxed atmosphere, independent studies and role-plays. The students need to know what they are expected to do and have suitable conditions to concentrate. On the other hand, there are extroverts who require high stimulation, cooperating with others and movement in order to learn. They also like open discussions and discovery activities. They are not afraid of making mistakes and experimenting with the language. Their personality traits facilitate the development of general oral communicative competence, which requires face to face interaction. Teachers should be aware of personality characteristics among learners and use a great variety if teaching methods in order to achieve the best results (Burruss and Kaenzig 1999). 2 Second language acquisition studies Ellis (1994) presents two major hypotheses concerning the relationship between extroversion/introversion and L2 learning. The first is that extroverted learners will do better in acquiring basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS). Extroverts are more eager to talk, to join the groups and participate in classroom activities. They will use the language more in and outside the classroom. The second hypothesis is that introverted learners will do better at developing cognitive academic language ability (CALP). Entwistle and Wilson (1977) claim that introverts will achieve more because they have better long-term memory than extroverts. Besides, they take learning a language in a more serious way and spend more time on reading and writing due to their personality traits. The extroverts are not able to concentrate for a long time and are too sociable to learn with the same attention (Eysenck 1957). Many investigators tried to support these hypotheses with research. Skehan (1989) makes a review of the actual research results in order to find the relationship between the theory and practice. He notices that some researchers did not obtain any positive correlations between extroversion/sociability and language achievement, (for example: Smart at al. 1970; Genessee and Hamayan 1980). On the other hand, Strong (1983) showed that extroversion was an advantage as far as communication skills are concerned. A positive relationship between extroversion and oral fluency was also found by Rossier (1976) and Pritchard (1952). Skehan (1989) also presents an amended version of the table grouping the studies of extroversion, which was provided by Strong (1983): Table 2.3. Second language acquisition studies divided according to type of language sampled and presence or absence of relationship with social traits. Positive relationship Non-relationship Pritchard (1952) SSC FL Genesse (1980) YC FL Quest Obser Rossier (1976) A Nat ? Suter (1977) Ely (1986) A A Nat FL Quest Quest NCL Wong-Fillmore (1976) C Nat Obser Strong (1983) YC Nat Quest Strong (1978) YC Nat ? Strong (1983) C Nat Obser Morrison (1961) A FL ? LTL Chastian (1975) A FL Obser Rossier (1976) A Nat ? Smart (1970) A FL Quest Swain (1976) YC FL Rating Chastian (1975) A FL Quest NCL= Natural communicative language LTL = Linguistic task language SSC = Secondary School Children YC = Young children A = Adults ? = Value not known Quest = Questionnaire The results presented in the table above show that positive relationships between extroversion and performance can be observed when the studies are conducted in naturalistic learning situations and when they measure natural communicative language. It could be also noticed that every study based on observations provides a positive relationship (Skehan 1989). Brown (1994:147) claims that “extroversion may be a factor in the development of general oral communicative competence, which require face to face interaction, but not in listening, reading and writing.” Personality characteristics are strongly related to other variables of the learners. Wankowski (1973) studied the relation between extroversion/introversion and age. He observed that extroverts do better in a primary school, however, the situation changes at higher education where introverts are more successful. This fact can be connected with the instruction learners are usually provided at different levels of education. Methods used with younger learners follow preferences of extroverts, whereas the tasks applied for teenagers and adults are more suitable for introverts (Skehan 1989). Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991) attempt to find explanations why there is so much diversity among research results connected with studying personality and language achievement. The first reason for that can be the difficulty in measuring personality traits. If the tests used are not valid the research will give false results. The second issue worth 2
discussing is that every study investigates different areas of the language so it does not show the overall proficiency of a student. It is also important to remember that different cultures have different standards of behaviour that are accepted in a given society. The way students are expected to perform in a classroom definitely affects second language learning, for example in Japan introversion is valued, while in USA extroverts are favoured. This is strongly connected with the type of instruction learners are exposed to during the lesson. While introverted learners prefer teacher-oriented methods, they can not benefit from the lessons that are conducted against their learning styles. Similarly extroverts can not use their abilities during the lessons that do not give them opportunities to work according to their preferences. The success of learners is determined by the methods teachers use in the classroom (Fillmore 1982). The conclusion is that the research studying the relationship between personality traits and SLA should measure students’ proficiency under various types of instruction in order to obtain relevant results. It is also suggested that personality characteristics may influence second language learning indirectly. “It may not in itself lead to SL proficiency but it may encourage people to continue with their study, which in turn promote SLA” (Larsen-Freeman and Long 1991:186). To sum up, there is some support that extroversion can help in acquisition of BICS, but there is no clear evidence linking introversion and the acquisition of CALP. Furthermore, “the effects of extroversion/introversion may be situation dependent, evident in some learning contexts but not in the others” (Ellis 1994:521). Skehan (1989) notices that process of SLA is a complex one and that both extroversion and introversion have positive features so it can not be stated that one is more beneficial than the other. It seems that in the best situation are ambiverts who fall more or less in the middle and reveal preferences of both groups. They adjust easily to new situations which enable them to meet different learning demands as learning and the use of language involve so many different skills. REFERENCES Brown, H.D. 1994. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Burruss, J.D. and L. Kaenzig. 1999. “Introversion: The Often Forgotten Factor Impacting the Gifted”. (http://cfge.wm.edu/documents/Introversion.html) 2006-03-11 Ellis, R. 1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Entwistle, N.J. and J.D. Wilson. 1977. Degrees of Excellence: The Academic Achievement Game. London: Hodder & Stoughton. Eysenck, H.J. 1957. Dynamics of Anxiety and Hysteria. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Eysenck, H.J. 1965. Fact and Fiction in Psychology. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Fillmore, W. 1982. “Instructional language as linguistic input: second language learning in classrooms” in L. Wilkinson (ed.), Communicating in the Classroom. New York: Academic Press. Hirsh, S. and J. Kummerow. 1994. Life Types. New York: Warner Books. Jung, C.G. 1923. Psychological types. New York: Harcourt Brace. Larsen-Freeman, D. and H. M. Long. 1991. An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research. New York: Longman. Myers, I.B. and P.B. Myers, 1980. Gifts differing. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Prichard, D.F. 1952. ”An investigation into the relationship of personality traits and ability in modern language”. British Journal of Educational Psychology 22:157-8. Skehan, P. 1989. Individual Differences in Second-Language Learning. London: Edward Arnold. 3
Page 1: EXTROVERSION/INTROVERSION SYLWIA GR

EXTROVERSION/INTROVERSION SYLWIA GRABIEC

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?