Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region XII
Division of Sarangani Province
ALABEL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Alabel, Sarangani

“Personality Types of Senior High School Teachers”

By

AldrenVillarosa
Mary Mae Torres
Apple Mangiling
Krisha Magleo
Rizaville Linda
Angel Palanca
Dena Esto
 Chapter 1

INTODUCTION

Background of the Study

Teachers have been widely to acknowledged to critically influence students

learning and achievements. Nonetheless, the effects of teacher characteristics on student
communication proficiency in the context of English as foreign language (EFL) learning
have not received adequate attention among scholars. In contrast to most studies area ,
this article focuses on the influence of teacher student interpersonal engagement ,
namely teacher’s personality and monitoring, on EFLstudent communication proficiency.
The purpose of this study is to explore whether teacher’s characteristics and
environmental learning factors influence students ‘over all communication proficiency.
Drawing on sociocultural theory, the authors assume that EFL learning is bi-directional in
nature. In addition to conceptualizing the direct impact or domain – specific determinants
of communication proficiency, internal classroom conditions and external high school
were assessed for possible moderating effects. Using a sample of high school students
in twelve different campuslocations. The classroom condition does not interact with
teacher’s personality to improve student learning outcome. Important
researchimplications in future directions are suggested.

Personality types and teaching performance of SHS teachers is a key for

studentcompetitiveness, no matter how difficult as long as determined. Teaching is
a reflection of teachers personality that affects of learning, as a source of interact
and energy play a crucial role in learning L.2 Polk (2014) mentioned that teachers
accomplished is affected by personal individuality and what teachers do and believe
will influence their student’s progress. Furthermore teacher’s personality does have
an influential effect on the achievement of many educational goals that have been
the of many studies. Among a number of personality variables in predicting English
Language proficiency, extroversion dichotomy has been extensively studied than
other personality traits. Extroverts are characterize as sociable, active risk taking
impulsive, expressive and they are the people who enjoy participating in groups
while introvert tend to be quiet , introspective and reserved except to intimate
friend. Both teaching and learning depend on the effective teacher who has been
conceptualized as the one that may produce desired results in the course of this
duty as a teacher ( uchefuna , 2012).

Therefore teachers must know their personality so that they can look for a
way to make them effective in Teaching, The effective Teaching is also dependent
on how the teachers selects the teaching methods. Fauziah and Agasnutheo (2010)
, state that it is important to select appropriate the effectiveness and quality of
Teaching.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The study will focus on observing the personality types and teaching performance
of senior high school teachers in Alabel NHS. Moreover, the result of the study
will be beneficial to the following:

Student: the result of the study may provide better information to the students for
them to gives insights about the Senior High School Teachers. They can use it on
how to appropriate the perseverance of teachers in doing their job .

Teachers: this study is beneficial to the teaching forces because through this
study they can picture out of what kind of personalities and attitude they have. It
may help them also to motivate their self to do their duties well .

School: the result of the study may help the school to determine of the teacher’s
quality. It may also showcase the competitiveness of teaching forces of Senior
High School in Alabel NHS. This will give them better idea on how to select a
very good teacher .

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:

This study aims to determine if there is a relationship between personality types

of senior high school teachers.

Specifically, this study will answer the following question :

 1. What is the Demographic profile of the senior’s teachers in terms of the
following:
a. Number of years in the service
b. Highest educational attainment
c. Civil status

2. What is the personality types of senior high school teacher according to

their personality variables?

SCOPE AND DELIMITATION :

This research will be delimited to SHS Teachers at ANHS in determining the

personality types of SHS Teachers of Alabel National High School. The Respondent
of this study will be the Grade 11 – 12 Teachers to be guided of their Personality
Types Performance. This study will be conducted on the year 2018 – 2019 .

Definition of Terms

Personality

The set of emotional qualities, ways of behaving, etc., that makes a person
different from other people.

Performance

An activity (such as singing a song or acting in a play) that a person or group

does to entertain an audience.

Teacher

A person or thing that teacher something especially: a person whose job is to

teach students about certain subjects.

Chapter II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

 The present study on the “personality and teacher effectiveness of high school
teachers in Gulbarga” is been associated with few works that has been conducted already
with regards to its purpose and relevance. It gives an idea of the studies that are
conducted in this field. It contains the studies related to different aspects and dimensions
of teacher effectiveness with respect to different aspects of personality, teachers’
characteristics and abilities. Study of relationship between personality and teaching
effectiveness revealed that the relationship between personality traits of extraversion,
agreeableness and conscientiousness has a positive relation with teaching effectiveness,
while the neuroticism and openness have no suggestive relationship with respect to
teacher effectiveness (Othman, 2010).

A study on teacher effectiveness revealed that teacher effectiveness includes a

teacher’s positive professional attitude, positive thinking, and belief in service, self-
regulation, dedication, autonomy and guidance to others. The study further reports that
an effective teacher intends students to develop positive self-confidence and self-esteem.
Additionally an effective teacher will take part enthusiastically in all the activities organized
by the school and they preferably have better interaction with colleagues, students and
parent (Ahmad, Said, Zeb, Sihatullah&Rehman, 2013).

Teacher effectiveness includes characteristics of a teacher, his personality,

attitudes etc., and process like teacher-pupil interaction and production variables like
outcomes of teacher-learning process, namely pupil achievement (Kulsum, 2006).

An effective teacher could create an effective learning environment, care and keep
the students enthusiastic in the class hours, promote authentic learning by questions
preferring interactive and discussions and manage to organize the classroom with little
difficulty and support students to be Relationship between Personality and Teacher
Effectiveness of High School Teachers © The International Journal of Indian Psychology
| 60 motivated towards success.

In recent years, development and use of observation instruments that capture the
quality of teachers’ instruction have provided a unique opportunity to examine these
theories empirically. One instrument in particular, the Classroom Assessment Scoring
System (CLASS), is organized around “meaningful patterns of [teacher] behavior…tied
to underlying developmental processes [in students]” (Pianta&Hamre, 2013, p. 112).

Factor analyses of data collected by this instrument have identified several unique
aspects of teachers’ instruction: teachers’ social and emotional interactions with students,
their ability to organize and manage the classroom environment, and their instructional
supports in the delivery of content (Hafen et al., 2015; Hamre et al., 2013).

A number of studies from developers of the CLASS instrument and their

colleagues have described relationships between these dimensions and closely related
student attitudes and behaviors. For example, teachers’ interactions with students
predicts students’ social competence, engagement, and risk-taking; teachers’ classroom
organization predicts students’ engagement and behavior in class (Hamre, Hatfield,
Pianta, & Jamil, 2014;; Luckner&Pianta, 2011; Pianta, La Paro, Payne, Cox, & Bradley,;
Luckner&Pianta, 2011), though, these studies have focused on pre-kindergarten settings.

Additional content-specific observation instruments highlight several other

teaching competencies with links to students’ attitudes and behaviors. For example, in
this study we draw on the Mathematical Quality of Instruction (MQI) to capture math-
specific dimensions of teachers’ classroom practice. Factor analyses of data captured
both by this instrument and the CLASS identified two teaching skills in addition to those
described above: the cognitive demand of math activities that teachers provide to
students and the precision with which they deliver this content (Blazar et al., 2015).

Validity evidence for the MQI has focused on the relationship between these
teaching practices and students’ math test scores (Blazar, 2015; Kane &Staiger, 2012),
which makes sense given the theoretical link between teachers’ content knowledge,
delivery of this content, and students’ own understanding (Hill et al., 2010)

In a separate line of research, several recent studies have borrowed from the
literature on teachers’ “value-added” to student test scores in order to document the
magnitude of teacher effects on a range of other outcomes. These studies attempt to
isolate the unique effect of teachers on non-tested outcomes from factors outside of
teachers’ control (e.g., students’ prior achievement, race, gender, socioeconomic status)
and to limit any bias due to non-random sorting. Jennings and DiPrete (2010) estimated
the role that teachers play in developing kindergarten and first-grade students’ social and
behavioral outcomes. They found within-school teacher effects on social and behavioral
outcomes that were even larger (0.21 standard deviations [sd]) than effects on students’
academic achievement (between 0.12 sd and 0.15 sd, depending on grade level and
subject area). In a study of 35 middle school math teachers, Ruzek et al. (2015) found
small but meaningful teacher effects on students’ motivation between 0.03 sd and 0.08
sd among seventh graders. Kraft and Grace (2016) found teacher effects on students’
self-reported measures of grit, growth mindset and effort in class ranging between 0.14
and 0.17 sd. Additional studies identified teacher effects on students’ observed school
behaviors, including absences, suspensions, grades, grade progression, and graduation
(Backes& Hansen, 2015; Gershenson, 2016; Jackson, 2012; Koedel, 2010; Ladd &
Sorensen, 2015).

To date, evidence is mixed on the extent to which teachers who improve test
scores also improve other outcomes. Four of the studies described above found weak
relationships between teacher effects on students’ academic performance and effects on
other outcome measures. Compared to a correlation of 0.42 between teacher effects on
math versus reading achievement, Jennings and DiPrete (2010) found correlations of
0.15 between teacher effects on students’ social and behavioral outcomes and effects on
either math or reading achievement. Kraft and Grace (2016) found correlations between
teacher effects on achievement outcomes and multiple social-emotional competencies
were sometimes non-existent and never greater than 0.23. Similarly, Gershenson (2016)
and Jackson (2012) found weak or null relationships between teacher effects on students’
academic performance and effects on observed schools behaviors. However,
correlations from two other studies were larger. Ruzek et al. (2015) estimated a
correlation of 0.50 between teacher effects on achievement versus effects on students’
motivation in math class. Mihaly, McCaffrey, Staiger, and Lockwood (2013) found a
correlation of 0.57 between middle school teacher effects on students’ self-reported effort
versus effects on math test scores.
 Our analyses extend this body of research by estimating teacher effects on
additional attitudes and behaviors captured by students in upper-elementary grades. Our
data offer the unique combination of a moderately sized sample of teachers and students
with lagged survey measures. We also utilize similar econometric approaches to test the
relationship between teaching practice and these same attitudes and behaviors. These
analyses allow us to examine the face validity of our teacher effect estimates and the
extent to which they align with theory.

There is little dispute that teachers are impactful agents in students’ educational
pursuits. It is also quite clear that some teachers are more effective than others (Atteberry,
Loeb, & Wyckoff, 2013), yet the source of such differences is largely unknown. For this
reason, scholars of various disciplines are laboring to identify factors that characterize
effective teachers. Just as individual differences in student non-cognitive characteristics
are important predictors of student outcomes (Heckman &Kautz, 2012; Richardson,
Abraham, & Bond,, 2012), individual differences in teacher non-cognitive characteristics
may also be important predictors (Rimm-Kaufman &Hamre, 2010).

The Big Five personality framework has been widely used to study the non-
cognitive predictors of student outcomes. Evidence to date shows that student personality
and, to some extent, parent personality (Nigg&Hinshaw, 2012) influence student
outcomes.Crawford, 2013) and job satisfaction (Judge, Heller, & Mount, 2014).

In educational research specifically, studies have found that the characteristics of

effective teachers are largely personality-based. For example, Patrick and Smart (2011)
reported from their factor-analyses that the traits of effective teachers were respect for
students, ability to challenge students, and having both organizational and presentation
skills. Moreover, teacher personality predicts teacher self-efficacy in both pre-service and
in-service teachers (Henson & Chambers, 2013; Jamil, Downer, &Pianta, 2012; Ripski,
LoCasale-Crouch, & Decker, 2011). At the tertiary education level, teacher personality is
associated with student evaluations of teaching (Kim &MacCann, 2016).

TEACHER PERSONALITY AND TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS

 Teacher effectiveness is a multi-dimensional construct, consisting of various
elements of the profession, which cannot be captured by a single criterion (e.g., student
academic achievement). The paradigm shift in the nature of the teacher effectiveness
construct is reflected in recent studies that aim to cover a wide outcome criterion space
by using multiple measures from different sources. For example, the large-scale
Measures of Effective Teaching project assessed teacher effectiveness using value-
added student academic achievement, teacher class observation ratings, and student-
ratings (Kane, McCaffrey, Miller, &Staiger, 2013).

We assessed two of the three elements included in the project: studentratings of

teacher support and value-added student academic achievement. We additionally
assessed student performance self-efficacy, which are student self-ratings of how well
they will perform in the subject, given its important links to student motivation (Bandura,
2012).

This study uses three different methodologies to measure the three measures of
teacher effectiveness: student-ratings of the teacher (other-report), student-ratings of the
self (selfreport), as well as school records of academic achievement (an objective
criteria). The use of multiple sources of information as well as targets (teacher and
student) allows us to examine the breadth of associations that teacher personality may
have with multiple measures of teacher effectiveness. In our examinations of the
association between teacher personality and teacher effectiveness, it is important to
control for non-random assignment of students to teachers. The primary source of non-
random assignment is streaming on the basis of academic ability (Johnston &Wildy,
2016), although other characteristics may inform this. In our study, we use previous
academic achievement as a baseline for predicting future academic achievement, but
also as one way to control for non-random assignment of students to teachers (as
students are assigned to class streams on the basis of academic achievement). As such,
previous academic achievement is a relevant control variable for all of the outcome
variables in the TEACHER PERSONALITY AND TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS 8 present
study (albeit with the caveat that there may be additional factors influencing nonrandom
assignment of students to teachers). Teacher Support. Greater levels of teacher
classroom stress are known to be associated with lower self-efficacy and lower job
satisfaction (Klassen& Chiu, 2010).

Applied to students, when a teacher behaves anxiously and verbalizes their doubts
and worries about their teaching and students’ skills, students may model the teacher’s
low selfefficacy and nervous behaviors. Furthermore, teachers’ emotional expressions
may foster emotional contagions, in which students unconsciously synchronize their
emotions with their teachers’ Through emotional contagion processes cues associated
with negative emotions arguably foster students’ own emotional states leading to
increased levels of anxiety and self-doubt similar to the emotions experienced by the
teachers. As a result, high levels of teacher neuroticism may diminish students’ PSE—an
approach-oriented construct. Academic Achievement. Student academic achievement is
the most frequently assessed measure of teacher effectiveness. Currently, there is no
conclusive indication of TEACHER PERSONALITY AND TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS
11 whether teacher personality is associated with academic achievement. On the one
hand, Garcia, Kupczynski, and Holland (2011) found that teacher conscientiousness
predicted academic achievement. More specifically, this study examined each tenth and
eleventh grade teacher’s levels of the Big Five to determine mean differences in student
scores on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge Skills (TAKS). Among English, social
studies, science, and mathematics teachers, those with high levels of self-reported
conscientiousness had students with high TAKS scores. On the other hand, Rockoff,
Jacob, Kane, and Staiger (2011) found no significant relationships between teacher
personality and academic achievement. Specifically, this study examined fourth to eighth
grade teachers’ levels of extraversion and conscientiousness separately to predict
student standardized mathematics test scores but found no significant associations in
either case (Rockoff et al., 2011).

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

 This chapter provides for the presentation of the conceptual framework and
discussion of related literature and study that served as bases for the researchers to
pursue this study.

Input Procedure Output

Demographic  Survey Identity of Personality

 Data Analysis Types of Senior High
Profile School Teacher

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework

Chapter III
 Methodology

This chapter presents the Research design , Data Gathering procedures ,

Research Instrument , Subject of the study , Research Paradigm and Statistical
treatment .

Research Design

This study used the descriptive research design because its describes
the Personality types of Senior High School teacher. It aimed to know the teacher’s
personality. If they are

The following figure shows the research paradigm that the researchers will follow

Research Paradigm
 “Personality Types of SHS
Teacher in ANHS”

Personality Types Research Design

Number of years in the service Quantitative

Highest educational attainment Descriptive

Sampling Procedure
Civil status
Purposive Sampling

Subjects

Senior High School Teachers

Locale of the Study

Alabel National High School

Instrumentation

Questionnaire

Data Analysis

Subject and Sampling of the Study

The subject of this study will be the Senior High School Teachers of Alabel
National High School S.Y 2018 – 2019 . They will be selected using purposive
sampling specific by total enumeration .

Research Instrument
 The primary instrument that the researcher will be using in this study will
be questionnaire . To establish the validity of the questionnaire it will undergo
validation by the three (3) master teachers . It will undergo several corrections and
revisions before it will be finalized and administered to the respondents . It will
consist of three (3) parts has ten (10) questions to be assessed by 5 – point Likert
scale .

Data Gathering Procedure

The researchers will gather literature from the google scholar , unpublished
study , books and e-books . The research questions is based on the topic to be
invented by the researchers , to established the validity of the questions it will
undergo several corrections and revisions by the three (3) masters teachers . The
researcher’s will conduct a survey questionnaire among all Senior High School
Teacher of Alabel National High School . The researcher’s will personally
administered the questionnaire and it will be talked and tabulated . All statistical
data like the responses of the respondents for each variable will be computed ,
analyse and interpreted with the help of statistician.

Statistical Treatment of Data

The respondents used weighted mean to determine the Personality types of

Senior High School Teachers . To interpret the mean, the following range scales
was used.

4.21 - 5.00 - Strongly Agree

3.41 - 4.20 - Agree

2.61 - 3.40 - Neither Agree

1.81 - 2.60 - Disagree

1.0 - 1.80 - Strongly Agree

(Optional) Name : _______________________________

Instructions:

In the table below for each statement 1-50 mark how much you agree with on the scale
1-5, where 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neither agree, 4=agree and 5=strongly
agree, in the box to the left of it.

Legend

Scale Description

5 Strongly Agree

4 Agree

3 Neither Agree

2 Disagree

1 Strongly Disagree

Personality Types of Senior Mean Description

 High School Teachers
1. Am the life of the party.. 3.00 Neither Agree
2. Feel little concern for others. 3.33 Neither Agree
3. Am always prepared. 4.03 Agree
4. Get stressed out easily. 3.16 Neither Agree
5. have a rich vocabulary. 3.53 Agree
6. Don’t talk a lot . 3.40 Neither Agree
7. Am interested in people. 3.73 Agree
8. Leave my belongings around. 3.03 Neither Agree
9. An relaxed most of the time. 2.73 Neither Agree
10. Have difficulty understanding abstract ideas. 2.33 Disagree
11. Feel comfortable around people. 3.56 Agree
12. Insult people. 1.70 Strongly Disagree
13. Keep in the background. 3.30 Neither Agree
14. Sympathize with others feelings. 3.63 Agree
15. Make a mess of things. 3.43 Agree
16. Seldom feel blue. 2.56 Disagree
17. Am not interested in abstract ideas. 3.20 Neither Agree
18. Start conversation. 2.66 Neither Agree
19. Am not interested in other people’s problems. 3.23 Neither Agree
20. Get chores done right away. 2.76 Neither Agree
21. Am easily disturbed. 3.66 Agree
22. Have excellent ideas. 2.93 Neither Agree
23. Have little to say. 3.56 Agree
24. Have a soft heart. 3.13 Neither Agree
25. Pay attention to details. 4.03 Agree
26. Worry about things. 3.46 Agree

27. Have a vivid imagination. 3.43 Agree

28. Talk to a lot of different people at parties. 3.73 Agree
29. Like order. 3.10 Neither Agree
30. Am quick to understand things. 3.60 Agree
31. Take time out for others. 3.96 Agree
32. Have frequent mood swings. 3.53 Agree
33. Don’t mind being the centre. 2.96 Neither Agree
34. Follow a schedule. 3.43 Agree
35. Spend time reflecting on things. 3.83 Agree
36. Make people feel at ease. 3.80 Agree
37. Often blue. 3.76 Agree
38. Often forget to put things back in their proper place. 2.63 Neither Agree
39. Get upset easily. 2.60 Disagree
40. Do not have a good imagination. 2.60 Disagree
41. Am not early interested in others. 2.16 Disagree
42. Change my mood a lot. 2.06 Disagree
43. Don’t like to draw attention to myself. 3.03 Neither Agree
44. Shirk my duties. 2.43 Disagree
45. Use difficult words. 3.26 Neither Agree
46. Feel others emotional. 4.00 Agree
47. Get irritated easily. 2.70 Neither Agree
48. Am quiet around strangers. 2.83 Neither Agree
49. Am exacting in my work. 3.56 Agree
50. Am full of duties. 4.06 Agree
160.12