The Application Of MBTI To Analyze EFL Teachers’ Teaching .

In-depth online interview was also applied to get moreunderstanding regarding teachers’ perspective towards theirpersonality and its correlation to the teaching style ortechniques they frequently applied. The interview was donethrough online text messenger and consists of open-endedquestions that allowed the participants to respondC. Data AnalysisThis study integrated both quantitative and qualitativeapproaches to acquire its data. Kothari (2004) ngcharacteristics that could be counted. Meanwhile, qualitativeapproach in a research study was commonly used toemphasize subjective assessment of certain perspective orassumption. In most cases, observation and interview wereused in such research design (Kothari, 2004).The study used survey questionnaire and MBTI test in16personalities.com to obtain quantitative data. The use ofMBTI in this study was to identify the personality types of allEnglish teachers who took part as samples. After thepersonality types of each teacher were classified, survey wasconducted by giving questionnaire consisted close-endedlikert-scale items that would help in gathering informationregarding EFL teachers’ teaching preferences. Then responsesof the given questionnaire were analyzed and checked with thetraits of each personality based on MBTI charts and its mentalfunctions. To determine if the items in the questionnaire wereconsistent in measuring the variables under investigation, theinternal consistency of the items was measured through acorrelation coefficient formula.Frequency analysis was done to find out the percentage ofdifferent personality types from the total numbers ofparticipants, and also to identify different responses from thescale of strongly disagree to strongly agree on eachquestionnaire item. Mode analysis was also conducted to findout the most personality types from the total numbers ofparticipants, as well as the most answered responses from allquestionnaire items.To obtain qualitative data, in-depth interview had been done tosome of the total English teachers participated in this study.The results of the interview were analyzed through ThematicContent Analysis to see the pattern of different personalitiesfrom the responses of each teacher during the interview.III.RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONAfter analyzing the responses of 75 (df: 75-2 73), Englishteachers as participants, the result of internal consistencymeasure shows that 17 out of 20 questionnaire items’ validityare consistent and showing the correlation value that above theminimum standard (0.23). Meanwhile, the other 3 items arefound to be inconsistent. Given below are the results ofcorrelation coefficient measure using correlation formula.TABLE 1. INTERNAL CONSISTENCY OF QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMSQ1234567891011121314151617181920r 50.60.70.50.30.60.6ValidityValidValidValidValidNot ValidNot ValidValidValidValidValidValidValidNot ValidValidValidValidValidValidValidValidBased on the validity check results, it has been decided thatthe analysis would only involve the 17 valid questionnaireitems. While the other 3 items, that are not valid, would beconsidered to be analyzed further for the needs of anotherresearch.The data collected from Google Form Questionnaires showedthat the 75 English teachers who participated to respond to thequestionnaire items had varied MBTI-based personality types.13 of them were identified as INFJ (17.3%), 10 others wereESFJ (13.3%), 9 teachers were ENFJ (12%), the other 8 wereENFP (10.7%), while there were 6 teachers classified as INTJ(8%). INTP (5.3%), INFP (5.3%), ISFP (5.3%) and ISFJ(5.3%) shared the same proportion with 4 teachers identifiedthemselves as the types. There were 3 teachers classified asENTJ (4%) and 3 more as ENTP (4%). There were 2 ISTJ(2.27%) and 2 ISTP (2.27%), while the rest of the types; ESTJ(1.3%), ESFP (1.3%), ESTP (1.3%), had only 1 representativeeach.Due to the uneven number of each type, the data are analyzedby firstly dividing the responses of different type into 16groups of data based on the Myers-Briggs Personality Types,then calculating the average value of each answer on thequestionnaire items by each group of personalities. Althoughall types are mentioned, the analysis is focused on thepersonality types with at least 4 representatives (5% of totalsamples). Thus, the given analysis and discussion are focusedon INFJ, ESFJ, ENFJ, ENFP, INTJ, INFP, INTP, ISFJ, andISFP.The responses from each group of personalities towards thequestionnaire items are varied. Although some personalitytypes share similar perspective regarding several teaching

beliefs that was delivered as survey items in the questionnaire,multifarious responses are also dominant. Based on theresponses of the English teachers with different personalitytypes, the following set of data was found, and analyzed.TABLE 2. RESULTS OF QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES BASED ON EACH PERSONALITY 4,04,03,04,04,03,04,04,05,04,02,04,03,0

From the given table, it can be seen that the 75participants have varied personality types withINFJ as the most dominant (17%) and ESFP, ESTJ,and ESTP with the least (1%). The responses toeach questionnaire item have been calculated intoaverage value of each type as it can be seen incolumn Q1 to Q20. Starting with the firstquestionnaire item, which is intended to identifyteachers’ preference in sharing trivial knowledge aspre-learning activity, the data show commonperception where most teachers, except ISTP,ESTJ, and ESTP, tend to share trivial informationto grab students’ attention at the beginning of theirclasses.For questionnaire item number 2, about engagingstudents to participate in early discussion beforemain lesson, only teachers with ENTJ as theirpersonality type who prefer giving lecture and donot expect for responses from the students.Meanwhile, ENFJ and ESTP become the type withthe most expectation towards students’ responsesamong other types.Preference in designing and applying languagegame is questioned in item number 3. Theresponses show some variations in teachers’perception. Most teachers agree that they like toapply language game to begin English class, whilesome teachers with INTP and ENTJ personalitytype tend to be neutral. One ESTJ teachersurprisingly dislikes the idea of using game inEnglish class.In classroom division, most teachers agreed to havesmall groups during some activities such asdiscussion or project. Meanwhile, 8 teachers do notlike the idea of creating small groups when itcomes to discussion or project making.Although it was proven to be slightly notconsistent, responses towards item number 5 showintriguing trend. Most teachers that participated inresponding the questionnaire item have similardisagreement when coming to their versatility inadapting to the situation, and modifying theirlesson plan. It is only ESTJ who states that he/shewould stick to his/her original plan no matter whatsituation is being faced during the lesson. For itemnumber 6, most teachers disagree that having morelecture is more important than conducting classdiscussion. However, ISTJ and ESTJ against thedominant population, and believe that havingconceptual explanation about certain theories ismore essential.Responses to item number 7 are generally comingto common belief that students are expected to beactively asking question and discuss after teachersexplain some concepts. However, differentperspective occurs in responses to item number 8where teachers with ISFJ and ENTJ as theirpersonality do not expect and try to avoid theirstudents from having off topic discussion duringEnglish lesson, although the students actively useEnglish. Almost all teachers who are classified asENFP, INTJ and INFJ do not have any problemwith off topic discussion.Questionnaire item number 9 identifies teachers’preference in language correction. Most teachersagree that content and context of the languageproduction is more important than the structure ofthe language produced by the students. However, asmall percentage of English teachers believe thatgrammar checking is also essential. For itemnumber 10, varied responses were gathered. Mostpersonality types including ENFP, INTJ, ESFJ andENTJ prefer to have planned power point slides orready-to-use materials to be written on white board.However, some other teachers with other types ofpersonality would like to use editable slides oropen-ended material that can be modified duringthe lesson such as some empty slides.Responses to item number 11 show common beliefof English teachers in giving project-basedassignment instead of theoretical exercises. It isonly the minority population of teachers with ENTJas their personality who believe that theoreticalbased assignment is more effective. The nextresponses, addressed to item number 12, show thatalmost every type agrees to give production taskssuch as writing and video making outside theregular class schedule. However, teachers that areclassified as ENTJ, ISFP, and ENTP believe that itis not an issue to give production project during thelesson.Number 13 is another invalid questionnaire item.However, the responses toward this statementregarding choice of topic and media are quitehighly varied. The top five types; INFJ, ESFJ,ENFJ, ENFP, and INTJ (61% of the totalparticipants) disagree with the statement thatindicates their preferences in topic are mostlydriven by personal perspective. However, the othertypes put their side on neutral, or even agree,although none of them choose strongly agree.Responses to item number 14 show quite similaragreement among the teachers with differentpersonality types. They believe that sharingresourceful material in the internet is necessary.Responses to item number 15 also indicates beliefsof most teachers regarding language productionthat is not only based on test results, but also can beseen throughout the process of learning, as well asinformal interactions among peers in the classroom.Only teachers with the personality types of INTP,

ENTJ, and ESTJ put neutral as their overallperspective.Responses to item number 16 and 17, which talkabout media usage such as videos, and alsoanimated graphic show that almost all types preferto include such interactive modality except someteachers with INTP, ESTJ and ENTJ personalities.Meanwhile, responses towards item number 18, 19,and 20, which are intended to see teachers’perspective in managing the class, show somevaried feedbacks. Apart from the majority, someteachers who are classified as ENFP, INTP, INFPand ISFJ prefer to not roam around the class afterassignment or task is given. However, ENFP andINTP still quietly observe the performance of thestudents, and the process during the task, whileISFJ, along with INFP, are most likely to be idleand wait from afar. The other types believe thatactive observation and roaming around the class areimportant part of lesson while the students aredoing task.A. Responses towards InterviewDue to the recent limitation in meeting people andthe policy of social distancing, some teachers whoparticipated in responding to the questionnaire wereinterviewed towards online messenger. Theinterviewed teachers are 2 INFJ, 2 ENFP, 1 INTJ, 1ISFJ and 1 INTP. They were asked questionsregarding their personal beliefs that are related totheir personality types, in relation to theirprofession as teacher who have experience inteaching at senior high school level.they would like to teach and the ones they finddifficult to handle in the classroom. INFJ and INTJtend to avoid ENTP and expect to have ESFP, andother introverted types such as ISFJ, ISTP, andINFP. Meanwhile, teachers with the personality ofENFP do not expect ISFJ in their class, and preferto teach a group consists of INFJ, INFP, ENFP, andESTP. Overall, they find MBTI interesting anduseful in identifying their own characteristics, aswell as their students, and other teachers as theircolleagues.IV.Based on the findings and discussions, it can beconcluded that MBTI play a significant role indriving English teachers’ perception and beliefsabout EFL teaching. However, it can also be seenthat different teachers who are classified indifferent personality types may have some commonbeliefs when it comes to something general as ithas been analyzed above.As the field of personality types and EFL teachingis still very broad, further research needs to be doneto discover new findings related to the particularfield. Some possible studies to be conducted aheadinclude the case study to discover deepercorrelations among EFL teaching and eachpersonality type, or the study that analyzedpersonality types influences in EFL learners.REFERENCES[1]The answers of teachers from different personalitygroups show some significant differences in theirbelief, while teachers with similar type tend toshare common thought regarding several beliefs inEFL teaching. For instance, the 2 INFJ, ISFJ andthe INTJ teacher prefer obedient group of studentswho attentively listening, instead of the highlycritical group of students that have probability ofactively ask and argue. Apart from their priorbelief, teachers under the personality of INFJ,INTP, and INTJ tend to expect their students to becooperative and obedient, but at the same time, donot mind having intense discussion with thestudents whenever needed. On the other hand,ENFP, and INTP demand the students to be moreversatile and critical. They do not like passive andoverly obedient students as it will limit theirchoices of strategies during the lesson. ISFJ,surprisingly, may adapt to any situation althoughthey prefer the obedient and cooperative one.Further responses show that different teachers havetheir personal preference in the type of studentsCONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]Altan, Mustafa Zulkuf (2018). Psychological Type andTeaching: A Case of Prospective ELT Teachers.International Journal of Languages’ Education andTeaching, Vol.6, Issue 2, 295-308.Behnam, Biook & Bayazidi, M. (2013). The relationshipbetween personality types and teaching styles in Iranianadult TEFL context. Global Journal of Foreign LanguageTeaching, 02 (2013), 21-32.Kise, Jane A.G (2005). Coaching Teachers for Change:Using the Concepts of Psychological Type to ReframeTeacher Resistance. Journal of Psychological Type, Issue6, 47-58.Kothari, C.R (2004). Research Methodology: methods andtechniques. New Age International (P) Limited. India.Myers, Isabel Briggs (1998). Introduction to Types. CCP,Inc. Mountain View, California.Rushton, Setephen. , Mariano, Jennifer Menon. , andWallace, Tary L (2012). Program Selection among PreService Teachers: MBTI Profiles within a College ofEducation. SciRes Literature, Vol.2, No.1, 1-8.Russell, Anne & Avgerinou, Maria. (2007). Using MyersBriggs Personality Preferences to Understand DifferentOnline Teaching Styles.Quenk, Naomi L (2009). Essentials of Myers-Briggs TypeIndicator Assessment. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. US.Limited, N. A. (2011). "It's so incredible to finally beunderstood." Retrieved August 16, 2020, fromhttps://www.16personalities.com/

extroverted traits. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a commonly used instrument to identify personality types. Population of this study was English teachers at senior high school level. Response to a survey regarding teaching style and media preferences in relation to the personality types of 75 English teachers in Lampung