Temperament, Brain Dominance, and Teaching Style Among English Teachers

TEMPERAMENTS, BRAIN DOMINANCE, AND TEACHING STYLES AMONG
ENGLISH TEACHERS
An Undergraduate Thesis
Presented to the Faculty of the English Department
College of Social Science and Humanities
Mindanao State University
General Santos City
In Partial fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree of
Bachelor of Arts in English
MELISSA C. CONFESOR
May 2016
Republic of the Philippines
MINDANAO STATE UNIVERSITY
General Santos City
-ooooOoooo-
COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES
APPROVAL SHEET
This undergraduate thesis entitled “Temperaments, Brain Dominance,
and Teaching Styles among English Teachers” prepared and submitted by
Melissa C. Confesor in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF ARTS IN ENGLISH has been examined and recommended for
oral examination.
SALVACION B. SANTANDER, M.I.E

Adviser
PANEL OF EXAMINERS
Approved by the Committee on Oral Examination
MELY B. SUBIERE, MAEd-TESL

Chairman
ROSSEL M. AUDENCIAL, M.I.E SALVACION B. SANTANDER,

M.I.E
Member Member
Accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

degree of BACHELOR OF ARTS IN ENGLISH.
Recommended by: Approved by:
LORENZO L. LAROCO, M.A.T. MAULAWI L. CALIMBA, M.A.

Chairperson Dean
________________ ________________
Date Date
Confesor Melissa C. “ Temperaments, Brain Dominance and Teaching Styles
among English Teachers.” Unpublished Undergraduate Thesis of Bachelor of
Arts in English. Mindanao State University, College of Social Sciences and
Humanities, English Department, General Santos City. May 2016.
Abstract
This study aimed to identify the correlation between temperaments, brain

dominance, and teaching styles of the English teachers. The study was
conducted using a survey through questionnaires distributed to 30 English
teachers in General Santos City High School, Labangal National High School,
and Fatima High School. The researcher used LaHaye’s temperament test to
determine the dominant temperament of the respondents. In brain dominance
test, the researcher used adopted printable test found in the internet. Moreover,
the researcher used Grasha’s teaching style test to determine the dominant
teaching style of the respondents. To determine the correlation of temperaments,
brain dominance and teaching styles, the researcher used the method of CHI
SQUARE. The result was that the dominant temperament of the respondents is
melancholic. The brain dominance of the respondents is left brain, while the
teaching style of most of the respondents is expert. Then, the correlation of
temperaments and brain dominance to teaching style is NOT SIGNIFICANT
which means that they are not correlated.
Keywords: Temperaments, Brain dominance, Teaching style, Dominance,

English Teachers
Acknowledgement
This study was made possible because of the unconditional love and
understanding of people who unselfishly extended their assistance, support in
both moral, financial and the inspiration needed to complete this work.
I would like to extend my grateful appreciation to our almighty God for
giving me the source of wisdom, guidance and strength throughout this study.
To Prof. Salvacion Santander, my adviser whose trust and understanding
enabled me to go on and finish the work.
To Prof. Rossel Audencial and Prof. Melly Subiere, my panel members
during the preliminary and final defense, for their comments and suggestions that
greatly helped improve this work.
To my parents, Edgar and Lene Confesor; to my siblings, Lesther,
Joven,and Lovejoy; and most especially to my hubby Elmer; and to my son
Aerhon Jade for their care, assistance and love. Thank you for being my
inspiration and understanding whenever I’m tired and easily angered because of
sleepless nights and stress. Thank you for motivating me whenever I feel
discouraged and rejected. Most of all, thank you for your constant support and
unfading love that made this task bearable and successful.
Finally, to my friends Ellen Jane and Gee-Ann who was very supportive
throughout this study and for their generosity, encouragement and support in all
my struggles in life.
Melissa C. Confesor
MSU-GSC CSSH English Department
Table of Contents
Page
Title Page i
Approval Sheet ii
Thesis Abstract iii
Acknowledgment iv
Table of Contents v
List of Appendices vi
List of Tables vii
Chapter
1 THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING
Introduction 1
Statement of the Problem 3
Scope and Delimitation 4
Significance of the Study 5
Definition of Terms 6
2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
On Temperaments 10
On Brain Dominance 12
On Teaching Style 14
Related Studies 17
Conceptual Framework 21
3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
Research Design 25
Data Gathering Techniques 27
Data Analysis 28
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF

4 30
DATA
5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 37
Summary of Findings 40
Conclusions 41
Recommendations 41
References 42
Curriculum Vitae 50
List of Appendices
Appendix Page
A Letter for the Respondents
B Temperament Test
C Brain Dominance Test
D Teaching Style Test

Correlation of Temperament,
E
Brain Dominance and Teaching Style
List of Tables
Table Page
A Schematic Diagram of Conceptual Framework
B Summary of Temperaments of the Respondents
C Summary of Brain Dominance of the Respondents

Chapter I
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING
This chapter consists of five parts. The Introduction which presents the
purpose and rationale of the study. The Statement of the Problem which states
the general and specific problems of the study. The Scope and Delimitation
which specifies the coverage and limitations of the study. Then, the Significance
of the Study which discusses the benefits that may be derived from the results of
the study and enumerates the persons who would benefit from them. Lastly, the
Definition of Terms, which provides the conceptual and operational definitions of
important terms that were be used in the study.
Introduction
Person’s temperament often stimulates consistent reactions from other
people, which, in turn, mold the child’s social development (Berk, 2000). Since
temperament is influenced by the people children interact with, it is critical that
teachers be aware of them and know how to handle them. Temperament can be
defined as stable, individual differences in both the intensity and quality of
emotional reaction (Goldsmith et al, 1987). Therefore, it is important to address
how individual temperaments, those of students and teachers, contribute to
children’s learning and achievement.
On the other hand, the learner’s dominant brain type has a very significant
effect on studying skills, homework, habits and grades. Understanding whether
students are right-brain or left-brain learners can help improve their academic
9
success during those crucial years when grades count toward college. Knowing a
student’s learning style is helpful to parents, teachers, tutors and most
importantly, to the students themselves. As a teacher, they can then seek out
teaching styles that align with their learning style (Enomoto, 2000).
Effective teachers allow students the opportunity to interact, learn,
succeed, and work to their topmost potential. When measuring teacher quality
one must determine the one thing that is connected directly to students’
achievement and teaching (Barnes & Aguerrebere, 2006). Research suggests
not one teaching method is best for everyone and many teaching styles can be
motivational (McCombs & Miller, 2007).
To expand her learnings about these factors in second language
acquisition the researcher has chosen the English teachers of General Santos
City National High School (GSCNHS), Labangal National High School and
Fatima High School as her respondents of her study. Moreover, the researcher
has chosen these respondents because they were able to teach and
communicate with students having different temperamental predisposition which
somehow related to this study. By considering these factors the researcher
hoped to successfully conduct and analyze her study for the teachers to
understand their temperamental predisposition, brain dominance and its relation
to their teaching style. Thus, it may also help them improve their way of teaching.
10
Statement of the Problem
This study determined the temperaments, brain dominance and teaching
styles of the English teachers of General Santos City National High School
(GSCNHS), Labangal National High School and Fatima High School.
Specifically, this study answered the following questions:
1. What is the dominant temperament of the teachers according to LaHaye’s
classification:
a. Sanguine
b. Choleric
c. Melancholic
d. Phlegmatic
2. What is the brain dominance of the teachers according to Brown’s
classification:
a. Right brain
b. Left brain
c. Ambidextrous
3. What is the dominant teaching style of the teachers according to Grasha’s
classification:
a. Facilitator
b. Expert
c. Personal model
d. Delegator
11
4. What is the correlation of temperament and brain dominance of the
respondents to their teaching styles?
Scope and Delimitation
This study focused on the temperament, brain dominance and teaching
styles of the English teachers of General Santos City National High School
(GSCNHS), Labangal National High School and Fatima High School. The
researcher delimited her study in determining the four temperament types of the
respondents according to the theories formulated by Hippocrates and developed
by LaHaye which are the following: sanguine, choleric, melancholic and
phlegmatic. Then, the researcher also determined the dominant brain type of the
respondents either right or left brain. Moreover, the researcher also determined
the teaching styles of the respondents through Grasha’s teaching style test.
Through the determined temperament and brain dominance of the respondents
the researcher also tried to determine the correlation of these two factors in
second language learning to the teaching style of the respondents which are the
following: facilitator, personal model, delegator, and expert.
12
Significance of the Study
This study may be of great help to the following.
The Society – this study may serve as guide of the people living in a
community in knowing how a certain personality of a person may affect his
capability in performing different tasks. More so, it may seriously contribute to
their everyday performance in living and interacting with other people.
The School Administrator – this study may contribute to the knowledge
of the school administrators specially the teachers with their awareness as to the
varying temperaments and brain dominance of the students, co-workers, and co-
teachers. It may also help the teachers to improve their teaching style for a better
and effective teaching. Furthermore, this may help the people inside the
institution towards unified and peaceful administrations.
The Teachers – this study may contribute to their teaching effectively and
properly understanding the student’s temperamental predisposition. Moreover, it
may help them improve their teaching styles that help the learners to learn easily.
The Researcher – the researcher tried to offer her views and learnings
about the temperament and brain dominance of a person and its relation to
teaching styles when it comes to learning and teaching English as a second
language. Thus, she became mindful of how a certain factor may affect or
influenced her learnings and studying methods. She may also have the
knowledge of the varying differences of the temperamental predisposition and
13
brain dominance of a person which can help her in understanding others
personality.
Definition of Terms
The following terms are used which contributed to the development and
better understanding of this study.
Brain Dominance – a particular thinking style with dominance in a portion
of brain hemisphere (MacLean, 1960). In this study, this is the result of the brain
dominance test that the respondents have taken up; the most number of lefts or
rights is their dominant hemispherical inclination or their dominant brain
use/function.
Choleric –the hot, quick, active, practical and strong willed temperament,
often self-sufficient and very independent (LaHaye, 1994). In this study, choleric
people are those respondents who got the highest mean score in section 1 of
self-assessment test in the temperament test administered by the researcher.
Delegator – concerned with developing student’s capacity to function in
an autonomous fashion. Students work independently on projects as part of
autonomous teams. The teacher is available at the request of students as a
resource person (Grasha, 1994). Operationally, these are the respondents who
got the highest mean score in numbers 21-30 of the teaching style test.
Dominant Temperament –the most overt among the four temperaments
of a person (LaHaye, 1994). Operationally, it refers to the result of the
14
temperament test taken by the respondents. The highest mean score among four
temperaments in the self-assessment test is the dominant temperament of the
respondents.
Expert –is a teaching style that possesses knowledge and expertise that
students need. Concerned with transmitting information and insuring that
students are well prepared (Grasha, 1994). Operationally, these are the
respondents who got the highest mean score in numbers 31-40 of the teaching
style test.
Facilitator –teachers with this type of teaching style will often ask
students to develop practical applications to enable the student to evaluate their
own learning abilities (Grasha, 1994). Operationally, these are the respondents
who answered the highest mean score in numbers 1-10 of the teaching style test.
Left Brain – left brain people respond in sequential, logical ways, guided
by the left hemisphere (Hermann, 1977). Operationally, in this study, they were
those respondents who have more “left” answers/mean score on brain
dominance test. Typically, dominant left brain teachers are more organized, they
always watch the clock, and they analyze information and process it sequentially.
Melancholic – the “dark” temperament. Analytical, self-sacrificing, gifted,
perfectionist type, with a very sensitive emotional nature (LaHaye, 1994).
Operationally, they are those respondents who got the highest mean score in
Section 2 in self-assessment test in the temperament test.
15
Personal model – believes in “teaching by personal example” and
establishes a prototype for how to think and behave. Oversees, guides, and
directs by showing how to do things, and encouraging students to observe and
then to emulate the instructors approach (Grasha, 1994). Operationally, these
are the respondents who answered the highest mean score in numbers 11-20 of
the teaching style test.
Phlegmatic – the submissive, easygoing and relaxed people (Warner,
2008). They are patient, well-balanced and calm. Usually have a consistent and
well balanced lifestyle. Operationally, they are those respondents who got the
highest mean score in Section 3 in the temperament test.
Right Brain – the right side of the brain is about creativity and flexibility.
Daring and intuitive, right brained people see the world in their unique way. Right
brainers have a talent for creative writing and art. They prefers day dreaming,
philosophy, and sports (Brown, 1973). In this study, they were those respondents
whose prevalent answers to the brain dominance test were “right”.
Sanguine – taken from the Latin word “sanguis” which means blood.
According to ancient Greek thought, the sanguine type is an individual who has
an excess of blood in his body. They were claimed to be cheerful and optimistic,
pleasant to be with, and comfortable with his or her work (Boerce, 1997).
Operationally, these are the respondents who got the highest mean score in
Section 4 of the temperament test.
16
Temperaments – the combination of inborn traits that subconsciously
affects all behavior which are passed on by genes, based on hereditary factors
and arranged at the time of conception (LaHaye, 1994). Operationally, this term
serve as the personality indicator of the respondent’s according to the test they
have taken.
Teaching style – is viewed as a particular pattern of needs, beliefs, and
behaviors that faculty display in the classroom (Grasha, 1994). Operationally, this
term serves as the indicator of what teaching style do the respondents possess.
17
Chapter II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
This chapter presents the concepts, theories, views, assumptions,
observations, claims and positions made by the authorities of the variables of
interest in this study. It also brings an account of studies conducted, which have
relevance in the present study.
On Temperament
Teaching is a highly skilled job and requires proper training and
preparation on the part of teacher. Teaching includes all activities required for
providing education to others. Cronin (1992) while highlighting the importance of
teaching excellence observed that, great teachers give students a sense not only
of who they are, but more important, of who they are, and who they might
become. They unlock their energies, their imaginations and their minds.
All teachers have students they just “click” with. And all teachers have
those students who, no matter what they try, they just can’t seem to reach. In
both cases, temperament – teacher and the student’s – may be part of that
equation. By understanding teachers’ temperament and making an effort to
understand students’, it can work towards a happier, smoother-running
classroom (Haynes, 2001).
18
a learner variable that has been associated with success in language learning
and use.
Teachers and researchers acknowledge that children’s temperaments
influence their reactions to the school environment and their interactions with
others. Therefore, it is important to address how individual temperaments, those
of students and teachers, contribute to children’s learning and achievement
(Keogh, 2003).
Keirsey (2004) stated that there are four types of temperament
understanding the different types of temperament is important to determine how
we should deal with students in the classroom.
The Sanguine type is an extroverted, fun-loving, activity-prone, impulsive,
entertaining, persuasive, easily amused and optimistic person. They are
receptive and open to others and built relationships quickly. They are animated,
excited and acceptant of others. They will smile and talk easily and often. It is not
unusual to feel as if you have known the Sanguine person for years after only a
few minutes. Sanguines are so people-oriented that they easily forget about time
and are often late arriving at their destination. They get bored easily because of
their orientation to social involvement, activity and general dislike for solitude.
They never lack for friends. Their attention span is based on whether or not they
are interested in the person or event. They can change their focus or interest in
an instant. Thus, they are competitive and tend to be disorganized. Unless very
19
disciplined, they will have difficulty controlling their emotions. They usually like
sports of any kind because of the activity and involvement with other people.
The choleric type is quick, hot tempered, and often aggressive. The
phlegmatic type is most often slow, lazy, and dull. Phlegm is mucus brought up
from the lungs when the individual has a cold or lung infection. Phlegmatic
people are thought to be cold, and shaking hands with them has been described
as shaking hands with a fish (Boeree, 1997). Finally, the melancholic type is sad,
depressed, and pessimistic.
Moreover, achievement in school is obviously related to a child’s ability, to
his motivation, to his experiences, and to the quality of instruction he receives.
Achievement is also related to temperament (Keogh, 2003).
According to research at UCLA, Keogh identified temperament
dimensions and factors that affected a child’s academic success in school. It is
said that the most important was task orientation, which is related to
temperament dimensions of activity level, distractibility, and persistence. The
results, like those of other researchers, confirmed that a child who achieves is
able to moderate physical activity appropriately, minimize distractions and focus
on task, and persist. Teachers like students with these temperament
characteristics find them easy to teach. Children with less positive temperaments
are often viewed by teachers as lower in “teachability”, requiring more teacher
time, management, and instruction.
20
It is important to note that a teacher, like each of her students, brings her
own temperament to the classroom. Some teachers are active, quick responding,
and intense. Others are deliberate, low key, and reflective. These differences
play out in the classroom. Classrooms differ in the pace of instruction, in the
nature of personal interactions, and in the emotional tone in the room (Keogh,
2003).
On Brain Dominance
The human brain is separated into two distinct hemispheres connected by
a corpus callosum, or a bundle of nerve fibers that facilitates communication
between the two hemispheres. It is known that popular psychology sometimes
makes broad generalizations about certain functions of the brain being lateral,
that is, located in either the right or left side of the brain. The lateralization theory,
developed by Roger Sperry and Robert Ornstein, helps us to understand our
behavior, our personality, our creativity, and our ability to use the proper mode of
thinking when performing particular tasks. Understanding how we learn and
process information is valuable for educators in numerous ways (Holbrook,
2011).
According to Fourie (1997), the respective functions of the brain can be
summarized as follows:
The left brain (Logical Brain), it controls movement on the right side of the
body, intellectual, language brain, decoding: breaking up in smaller parts,
experimenting systematically, analytical, categorizing, logical problem solving,
21
seldom uses analogy and metaphor, abstraction, debates/argues, verbal
memory, managing time: the present is future focused, symbols, objectives,
plans and controls, adopts to environment, prefers auditive and visual
information.
Moreover, left-brain learners best absorb material by listening to lectures
in which the material is logical and has a set of defining rules. A typical left-brain
learner takes neat notes and keeps a well-organized binder. Timed tests are not
overly challenging. Thus, left-brained thinkers read directions carefully and
thoroughly. They follow sequential reasoning, seeking definitive final answers
and closure (Enomoto, 2000).
The right brain (Gestalt Brain), controls movement on the left side of the
body, intuitive, non-verbal (body) language, encoding: parts from a whole,
experimenting without system, synthetical, intuitive grouping, intuitive problem
solving, prefers analogy and metaphor, insight, visualizes, recognizes patterns,
sees time as secondary to the present, sensual images, subjective, spontaneous
and flexible, adapts environment to self, prefers movement, color and pictures
(Fourie, 1997).
Right-brain thinkers often have common characteristics. For example,
they’ll scan directions, rather than listen to or thoroughly read directions.
Visualizing a picture can help them remember facts. Thus, the right-brain
learners tend to be day dreamers who lose track of time. They are visual
22
students who thrive on hands-on learning. Sitting, listening and taking notes can
be a struggle (Enomoto, 2000).
The use of the whole brain will also improve the life skills of a person,
seeing that the hidden potential of such person is developed through brain
integration (Jensen, 1995). Brain integration describes the process according to
which people try to develop and use their full potential may it be physically,
psychologically or spiritually, throughout their lives (Dennison & Hargrove, 1991).
Though students use every part of their brain in the learning process, and
none are strictly “right brain only” or “left brain only”, most are either left brain
dominant or right brain dominant –meaning not every teaching style completely
fits their learning style (Holbrook, 2011).
On Teaching Style
Various researchers have stressed different aspects of styles in teaching.
Gregorc (1979) indicated that a teaching style –consist of a teachers personal
behaviors and the media used to transmit data to or receive it from the learner.
Teaching style refers to educators behaviors as they teach in the classroom
(Genc & Ogan-Bekiroglu, 2004).
Educator’s personal qualities are considered persistent (Conti, 1989;
Shieh, 2005). According to Conti, -the overall traits and qualities that a teacher
displays in the classroom and that are consistent for various situations can be
described as teaching style. Fischer (1979) similarly defined teaching style. He
23
stated that the teaching style of an instructor might persist even when he or she
uses several teaching techniques and methods.
Grasha (1996) supported the idea of viewing teaching style in terms of its
elements. He defined teaching style as several elements that teachers
demonstrate in every teaching-learning moment-behaviors, roles, instructional
practices, characteristics and beliefs. He was in agreement with Dunn and
claimed that educators should modify their teaching styles so as to meet the
needs of all students.
Teaching style is viewed as a particular pattern of needs, beliefs, and
behaviors that faculty display in the classroom. Grasha’s teaching styles are
classified as: Expert (transmitter of information, sets standards and defines
acceptable ways of doing things); Personal Model (teaches by illustration and
direct example); Facilitator (guides and directs by asking questions, exploring
options, suggesting alternatives); and Delegator (develops students ability to
function autonomously).
The expert style possesses knowledge and expertise that students need.
They strive to maintain status as an expert among students by displaying
detailed knowledge and by challenging students to enhance their competence.
They are also concerned with transmitting information and insuring that students
are well prepared. They provide positive and negative feedback, establishing
learning goals, expectations and rules of conduct for students. They observed
24
the correct, acceptable, and standard ways to do things and with providing
students with the structure they need to learn.
The Personal Model style of teaching believes in “teaching by personal
example” and establishes a prototype for how to think and behave. Oversees,
guides, and directs by showing how to do things, and encouraging students to
observe and then to emulate the instructor’s approach.
Moreover, the facilitator style of teaching emphasizes the personal nature
of teacher-student interactions. They guides and directs students by asking
questions, exploring options, suggesting alternatives, and encouraging them to
develop criteria to make informed choices. The overall goal is to develop in
students the capacity for independent action, initiative, and responsibility. Works
with students on projects in a consultative fashion and tries to provide as much
support and encouragement as possible.
Lastly is the Delegator style of teaching, they are concerned with
developing students’ capacity to function in an autonomous fashion. Students
work independently on projects or as part of autonomous teams. The teacher is
available at the request of students as a resource person (Grasha, 1996).
However, McCombs and Miller (2007) adds that there is no one teaching
method best for everyone and many teaching styles can be motivational.
Teaching styles and the curriculum should accommodate the variety of learning
style preferences for all students. It is important for teachers (and those providing
instruction to them) to be aware of learning style differences so teachers can
25
offer an inviting learning environment, maximize learning, and minimize stress
(Gresham, 2007).
Thus, these reviewed literatures show that the underlying concepts of
temperaments, brain dominance and teaching styles have all been one
presenting that these factors are helpful in accessing one’s performance both in
everyday life and learning especially the second language.
Related Studies
This part contains different studies that are relevant to this study. These
studies also provide adequate details needed in the said study.
Abatayo (2012) in her study “Temperament and Brain Dominance among
3rd year BSED English” discussed the relationship between these two factors in
second language learning of the respondents. She concluded that the
performance of a student does not necessarily indicate his/her temperament type
nor determine his/her skills according to brain dominance.
This study is similar to the present study because the researcher used the
temperament and brain dominance test used in this study, however, the
difference is that the recent study added the teaching style test and the
respondents were teachers.
Bester (2001) proved in her study entitled “The Potential Link Between
Brain dominance and Temperament, Learning and Personality Styles: a Personal
and Professional Leadership Perspective” that there is really a potential li nk
26
between brain dominance and temperament, learning and personality styles by
the means of interpretation from literature thus came up with a Personal
Portrayal Profile that shows the potential links of the said pairs of factors in
learning. Moreover, through this study, the notion whether brain dominance and
temperament is interconnected is being supported.
This study is similar to the present study because it talks about
temperaments and brain dominance, however, the difference from this study is
that it talks about temperaments and brain dominance being interconnected while
the present study talks about the temperaments and brain dominance and its
correlation to teaching style.
Frias (2013), in her study “ Temperament and Brain dominance among
AB English Freshmen of MSU-GSC” finds out that the dominant temperament
which is the melancholic temperament is appropriate to this course because it
demands activities that best fit their learning patterns such as constant analysis
of literary pieces and linguistic exercises.
This study is similar to the present study because they talk about
temperament and brain dominance, the researcher also used the temperament
test in this study to her present study and they had the same results in
temperament test. The difference is that the respondents of this study were the
AB English Freshmen while the present study were the English teachers.
Farkas (2003) investigated the effect of teaching styles on two groups of
seventh-grade students. Students in the experimental group preferred similar
27
learning styles and were taught according to their preferences, while the control
group was taught with a conventional teaching style. In this study, the students in
the experimental group, who received a teaching style that matched their
preferred learning styles, outperformed the control group academically. The
experimental group also showed more positive attitudes toward learning, more
understanding of people’s feelings, and an increased ability to transfer what they
had learned from one area to another.
This study is similar to the present study because the researcher used the
teaching style test used in this study. Thus, the difference between these studies
is their respondents because the respondents of this study were students while
the respondents of the present study were the English teachers.
Hughes (2009) researched the relationships between teaching style
perceived by students and teaching styles adopted by instructors. A total of 117
students participated in the study and were put into either a control group or an
experimental group. The instructor taught control-group students pre-calculus
with a conventional lecture-based approach. On the other hand, two instructors in
the experimental group adopted a teaching style that increased student
involvement; they also provide real-life examples and sufficient time for students
to learn a concept by asking questions. The results showed a significant
difference in students’ perceptions of teaching styles between the control group
and experimental group. The results also revealed that students felt they learned
better when instructors employed a teaching style that was more interactive than
when adopted a conventional lecture style.
28
This study is similar to the present study because both used same
instrument in their studies. However, there are also difference between these
studies, this study talks about teaching style as perceived by the students while
the present study talks about teaching style being correlated with temperaments
and brain dominance.
Salmani (2011), in his study “ Temperament as an indicator of language
achievement”, concluded from 139 students from Kish International Campus of
the University of Tehrain in Iran that extroverts had an advantage over introverts
in their achievement in their speaking classes. The study also found out that
within the extrovert groups, the sanguine outperformed the choleric. This
indicates that being emotional and unstable can exert a counter-balancing
pressure on the language learner which will lead to a lower level of speaking-skill
achievement.
This study is also similar to the present study because of the instrument
used in this study which is the temperament test. The difference between this
study is that the temperament as an indicator of language achievement, while the
present study talks about temperament being correlated with teaching style.
The studies supported the claim that the brain dominance and
temperament of a person determine his performance or function whether inside a
society or inside the classroom.
29
Conceptual Framework
The teachers being the focal figure in education must be competent and
knowledgeable in order to impart the knowledge they could give to their students.
Effective teaching is concerned with the student as a person and with his general
development. It is always fact that as educators, they play varied and vital roles
in the classroom. Thus, this study aims to know the temperament and brain
dominance of the respondents to vary their teaching styles to a better and
effective teaching.
On the other hand, the four temperament theory provides the best
explanation of why we act the way we do. One of the most prolific promoters of
the occult theory is Dr. Tim LaHaye and in this study, his four temperament test
was used to determine the respondent’s dominant temperament predisposition.
LaHaye’s temperament test offers simplistic explanation for the complexity
of individual differences. Furthermore, the brain dominance test used in this
study is one of that easy and not time consuming tests found in the internet.
Lastly, the researcher used Grasha’s teaching style test to determine the
teaching style of the respondents.
Assessing the results of these tests, the researcher looks for some
statistical treatment from an established statistician of how these two underlying
factors in language learning interrelate with teaching styles.
According to LaHaye, a sanguine has these list of possible traits or words
which somehow describe the person with this type of temperament: emotional,
30
egotistical, interrupt others, compassionate, impulsive, disorganized, funny,
forgetful, very positive, easily angered, undisciplined, extrovert, refreshing,
lively/spirited, weak-willed, spontaneous, talkative, delightful/cheerful, enjoyable,
popular, friendly, sociable, restless, difficulty concentrating, likes to play, difficulty
keeping solutions, lives in present and has difficulty with appointments.
The choleric type of temperament has these possible characteristics:
optimistic, determined, bossy, goal-oriented, decisive, frank, self-confident,
sarcastic, workaholic, self-sufficient, practical, headstrong, activist, outgoing,
domineering, adventurous, aggressive, competitive, leadership ability, daring,
persevering, bold, strong-willed, persuasive, hot tempered, resourceful,
insensitive, outspoken, unsympathetic, and productive.
The melancholic is: deep feeling, critical, insecure, sensitive, indecisive,
hard to please, self-centered, pessimistic, depressed easily, easily offended,
idealistic, loner, self-sacrificing, introvert, faithful friend, analytical, considerate,
likes behind the scene, suspicious, respectful, introspective, planner,
perfectionist, scheduled, unforgiving/resents, orderly, creative, detailed, moody,
and gifted (musically/athletically).
Lastly, phlegmatic people according to LaHaye are: very quiet, selfish,
unenthusiastic, negative, regular daily habits, hesitant, shy, stingy, aimless, not
aggressive, stubborn, worrier, spectator of life, works well under pressure,
indecisive, adaptable, slow, lazy, submissive to others, easy going, reserved,
31
calm and cool, content/satisfied, efficient, patient, listener, witty/dry humor,
pleasant, teases others and consistent.
The brain dominant test which was used in this study was composed of 40
items from the standardized Brain dominance Test revised by Evelyn C. Davis of
UP Open University which is adopted from Left-Right Brain Dominance Test by
Brown (1994).
Assessing the results of these tests, the researcher looks for some
statistical treatment from an established statistician of how these two underlying
factors in language learning interrelate with teaching style.
According to Grasha, the expert teacher possesses knowledge and
expertise that the students need. This style is based on the outcomes and may
not always include the thoughts processes involved in reaching conclusions.
The formal authority gains his/her status and respect of his/her position as
faculty member. They are the sole person of authority and leadership. Teachers
tend to focus on the content and feel responsible for providing and controlling the
flow of the content, thus, student is expected to receive the content.
Lastly, the facilitator type guides and directs students by using various
methodologies. The goal is to develop in the student the ability for independent
thought and action. Moreover, this teaching style tends to focus on activities.
There is more responsibility placed on the students to take initiative for meeting
the demands of various learning tasks.
32
English Teachers of GSCNHS,

Labangal National High School and
Fatima National High School
Temperaments Brain Dominance
Sanguine Left brain

Choleric Right brain
Melancholic ambidextrous
Phlegmatic
Teaching Style
Facilitator
Expert
Personal model
Delegator
Figure 1 Schematic Diagram of Conceptual Framework
33
Chapter III
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the research design used in te stdy. This includes
the description of the variables, the subject of the study, and the instrument in
data gathering.
Research Design
This study is descriptive-correlational method. It determines and correlates
the temperaments, brain dominance and teaching styles of the English teachers
of General Santos City High School, Labangal National High School and Fatima
High School of G.S.C sy 2015-2016. The method is used to identify the dominant
temperament of the respondents –sanguine, choleric, phlegmatic, or
melancholic. Thus, the temperament test use in this study is adopted from
LaHAye’s (1983) questionnaire.
Secondly, this study also tried to determine the brain dominance either
right, left, or ambidextrous. Specifically, the brain dominance test used in this
study was adopted from the standardized Brain dominance test revised by
Evelyn C. Davis of UP Open University which was adopted from Left-Right Brain
Dominance Test by Brown (1994).
Finally, this study also tried to determine the teaching styles –expert, personal
model, facilitator, and delegator. Thus, the teaching style test used in this study
was adopted from Grasha’s teaching style test (1996). Moreover, this study also
34
tried to determine the correlation of these two factors, temperament and brain
dominance, in second language learning to the teaching style.
Respondents of the Study
The respondents of the study were the English teachers of General
Santos City National High School, Labangal National High School and Fatima
High School, school year 2015-2016. There were 10 respondents in each school,
a total of 30 respondents.
There were 13 English teachers in Labangal and Fatima High School;
however, there were only 10 papers returned during the collection of papers. In
GSCNHS, there were 18 English teachers who took the tests but only 10 papers
were returned. Thus, it comprised of 30 respondents, 10 respondents in each
school.
Instrumentation
The instrument used in the study was a questionnaire adopted from
LaHaye’s temperament test, the printable brain dominance test from the internet
and Grasha Reichmann’s Teaching Style test.
The temperament test devised by LaHaye consists of the list of the
possible traits of a person, which is divided into four sections:
1 –sanguine, 2 –choleric, 3 –melancholic, 4 –phlegmatic with 30 possible traits in
each section. 5 being the most like them and 1 being the least. In scoring, the
researcher added all the scores listed by the respondents themselves on each
35
character trait and placed the totals below each section of the traits. It must be
noted that these four sections were not named/labeled in the test which means
that the respondent did not know what temperament would he/she rate higher to
avoid being subjective. The highest total number among the four sections was
considered the dominant temperament of the respondents.
In determining the brain dominance, the researcher used the printable test
from the internet. The said test consisted of 32 possible descriptions or
characteristics that best apply to a person. In this instrument, there was a total for
each brain hemisphere 16 traits for left brain and 16 for right brain. The
respondents answered yes or no for each question. The most numbers were
determined as the brain dominance of the respondents.
Moreover, in determining the teaching style, the researcher used Grasha-
Reichmann’s teaching style test. The test consisted of 40 possible descriptions or
characteristics best apply to a person. The respondents will answer 5 as the
highest and 1 as the lowest characteristics that described him or her. In scoring,
each set of numbers corresponded to a certain teaching style. Such as in
numbers 1-10, it has a corresponding style of facilitator.
36
Data Gathering Procedure
The researcher in conducting her study went to every school which were
the GSCNHS, Labangal National High School and Fatima High School. She got
the names of the English teachers from the principal’s office and distributed the
questionnaires to the English teachers. In collecting the test, the researcher,
went again to each school and collected the papers.
Data Analysis
To determine the dominant temperament of the respondents, the
researcher added all the scores listed by the respondent themselves on each
character trait and placed the total below each section of the traits. It must be
noted that these four sections were not named/labeled in the test which means
that the respondent did not know what temperament would he/she rate higher to
avoid being subjective. The highest total number among the four sections was
considered the dominant temperament of the respondents.
To determine the brain dominance of the respondents, the researcher
used the printable test from the internet. The said test consisted of 32 possible
descriptions or characteristics that best apply to a person. In this instrument,
there was a total for each brain hemisphere -16 traits for left and 16 for right. The
respondents answered yes or no for each question. The most numbers were
determined as the brain dominance of the respondents.
Moreover, to determine the teaching style of the respondents, the
researcher used Grasha-Reichmann’s teaching style test. The said test consisted
37
of 40 possible descriptions or characteristics best apply to a person. In scoring,
each set of numbers corresponds to a certain teaching style. For example,
numbers 1-10 have a corresponding style of facilitator. To determine the style,
the researcher added all the numbers that the respondent answered and placed
the total below. It must also note that each set of numbers has corresponding
style, like 11-20, and 21-30, and 31-40. The highest score among these sets is
the teaching style of the respondents.
From the data gathered, the chi square method was used in determining
the correlation of temperament and brain dominance to teaching style. The chi -
square test was used in the cases where the elements of the basic set of
measurements have only one character X, which is a random variable, qualitative
or quantitative type. Thus, Pearson’s chi square test (x²) was a statistical test
applied to sets of categorical data to evaluate how likely it is that any observed
differences between the sets arose by chance. It is suitable for unpaired data
from large samples.
38
Chapter IV
PRESENTATION OF DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter deals with the presentation, analysis, and interpretation of
gathered data. The data being presented were used to answer the specific
problems stated at the beginning of the study.
Specifically, it answered the following questions.
classification:
a. Sanguine
b. Choleric
c. Melancholic
d. Phlegmatic
Table 1 The Dominant Temperament of the Respondents
Temperament Mean score %
Melancholic 97.7 36.7
Choleric 94.2 23.3
Sanguine 93.2 20.0
Phlegmatic 92.3 20.0
39
Table 1 presents the dominant temperament of the respondents. The data
showed that melancholic temperament was the most dominant (36.7 %), followed
by choleric (23.3 %), others were sanguine (20.0%) and phlegmatic (20.0%).
This indicated that majority of the respondents were analytical and quiet.
The findings in the study were similar to the findings of Frias (2013), in her
study “Temperament and Brain Dominance among AB English Freshmen of
MSU-G.S.C”. She stated that melancholic temperament is appropriate to this
course because it demands activities such as constant analysis of literary pieces
and linguistic exercises in their learning, while English teachers, needed constant
knowledge in linguistic and literature in order for them to share their knowledge in
different aspects of literary pieces. This implies that English students and English
teachers are creative, detailed and imaginative, for these traits are required to
understand and analyze linguistics and literature.
The melancholic temperament is often times known as the thinker. They
tend to be deep-thinkers and feelers who often see the negative attributes of life,
rather than the good and positive things. They are self-reliant and independent
and get wholly involved in what they are doing. Melancholies can be highly
creative in activities such as art, literature, music, health-care and ministry, and
can become preoccupied with the tragedy and cruelty in the world. Melancholies
usually have a high degree of perfectionist tendencies, especially in regards to
their own lives or performance. They are serious, purposeful, analytical, musical,
artistic, talented, creative, self-sacrificing, conscientious, idealistic, philosophical,
and are generous prone (Ekstrand, 2012).
40
On the other hand, the choleric is the strongest of the extrovert
temperament and they are usually called the doer. This type of temperament was
for strong control and authority; the desired characteristics for leadership and
accomplishing goals (Ekstrand, 2012).
In addition, Zhen (2012) commented that teachers need to thoroughly
read the texts and come up with their opinions to motivate pupils to come up with
their own views. The melancholy teacher has no problem in reading and deeply
analyzing the text. The fact that one is introverted means they will not impose
their views on the learners. They will quietly listen to their views. Learners have
the opportunity to discuss, debate, and express themselves thereby cultivating
their love for literature. The melancholic teacher will analyze every aspect of a
novel.
classification:
a. Right brain
b. Left brain
c. Ambidextrous
Table 2 The Brain Dominance of the Respondents
Brain Dominance Mean score %
Left 16.2 56.7
Right 13.7 43.3
41
Table 2 shows the brain dominance of the respondents. There were more
left brain dominants as compared to the right dominants. The left brain
dominance was identified as the logical brain; it controlled movement on the right
side of the body.
Most of the respondents are left brain dominant which is expected
because their field of discipline requires their left brain to operate and work their
proper function as educator. More so, left brain is the “language brain” and
person with such predominant hemispherical inclination prefers auditive and
visual processing information which a teacher should be for they teach through
visual aids and lectures. It is most efficient for processing verbal information,
such as encoding and decoding speech (Holbrook, 2011).
As posited by Enomoto (2000) the left brained thinkers read directions
carefully and thoroughly. They followed sequential reasoning, seeking definitive
final answers and closure. These were true among teachers; they were mostly
the logical thinkers.
On the right brain dominance, they were known as the Gestalt Brain. It
controlled movement on the left side of the body; it was mostly intuitive and non-
verbal or body language (Fourie, 1997).
Moreover, “In 95 percent of right-handers, the left side of the brain is
dominant for language. Even in 60-70 percent of left handers, the left side of the
brain is used for language,” the Web site, Neuroscience for kids said.
42
classification:
a. Facilitator
b. Expert
c. Personal model
d. Delegator
Table 3 The dominant Teaching Styles of the Respondents
Teaching Styles Mean score %
Expert 40.1 36.7
Personal 40.0 23.3
Delegator 39.6 23.0
Facilitator 38.9 20.0
Table 3 presents the data of the teaching styles of the respondents. It
shows the number of teacher in each teaching style and its equivalent
percentage based on the total number of respondents. This result shows that
most of the respondents belonged to the expert style of teaching.
Thus, what differentiates expert teachers from others is that expert
teachers understand their subject matter and they also understand the students
that they are teaching. This understanding allows teachers to provide rich
43
problems, to adapt these problems so that they can be used at many levels of
difficulty, to listen to student reasoning to help assess student understanding, to
use good questioning techniques that help students reflect on their own
reasoning processes, and to adapt lessons to maximize the learning for all
students (Findell, 2011).
Table 4 Relationship between the Temperament, Brain Dominance, and
Teaching Styles
Variables correlated Chi Square p-value Remark
Temperament and 7.520 .583 Not Significant
Teaching styles
Brain Dominance and 3.274 .351 Not Significant
Teaching styles
Table 4 presents the relationship between temperament, brain dominance
and teaching styles of English teacher from selected schools in GSCNHS,
Labangal National High school, and Fatima High School.
The results revealed that there was no significant relationship between the
said variables as supported by a Chi square of 7.520 with a p-value of .583 for
temperament and chi square value of 3.274 with a p-value of .351 for brain
dominance. Since a p-value of greater than .05 (p=.583 >.05 and p=.351 > .05)
44
indicates that the relationship between these two variables is not significant. This
implied that the teachers’ temperament and their brain dominance did not affect
their teaching styles.
Moreover, Singh (1989), Chaddha (1991) and Verma (1992) revealed
from their studies, “Temperament and Socio Communicative Orientations”, that
the temperament of school teachers did not show any positive correlation with
creativity or stress or academic achievement. Also, Valensik et al. (2010) found
no relationship between temperament of school teachers and classroom
interactions.
45
Chapter V
SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents the summary, findings, conclusions, and
recommendations based from the gathered data in this study.
Summary
This study tried to determine the temperaments, brain dominance and
teaching style of the English teachers of GSCNHS, Labangal National High
School and Fatima High School.
Specifically, it answered the following questions:
classification?
a. Sanguine
b. Choleric
c. Melancholic
d. Phlegmatic
The researcher used the adopted temperament test devised by LaHaye
(1994) in determining the temperament of each respondent. The dominant
temperament of the respondents is melancholic (36.7%) or 11 out of 30, which
indicates that their field of discipline really affects their behavior and personality
46
as English teacher, they tend to be more sensitive and moody after a long day.
The melancholic temperament is often times known as the thinker. They
tend to be deep-thinkers and feelers who often see the negative attributes of life,
rather than the good and positive things. They are self-reliant and independent
and get wholly involved in what they are doing. Melancholies can be highly
creative in activities such as art, literature, music, health-care and ministry, and
can become preoccupied with the tragedy and cruelty in the world. Melancholies
usually have a high degree of perfectionist tendencies, especially in regards to
their own lives or performance. They are serious, purposeful, analytical, musical,
artistic, talented, creative, self-sacrificing, conscientious, idealistic, philosophical,
and are generous prone (Ekstrand, 2012).
classification?
a. Right brain
b. Left brain
c. Ambidextrous
The result indicated that most of the respondents were left brain
dominant, consisted of 56.7 of their total count (17 out of 30), because they tend
to encounter a lot of activities and exercises everyday which requires their
“language brain” to work and analyze. More so, left brain is the “language brain”
and person with such predominant hemispherical inclination prefers auditive and
visual processing information which a teacher should be for they will teach
47
through visual aids and lectures, it is most efficient for processing verbal
information, such as encoding and decoding speech (Holbrook, 2011)
classification?
a. Facilitator
b. Expert
c. Personal model
d. Delegator
The researcher used Grasha’s teaching style in determining the teaching
style of the respondents. The result indicated that most of the respondents were
expert in their style of teaching which means that they tend to give more
information, details, and knowledge rather than let the students take information
from other sources (Findell, 2011).
There was no significant relationship between the said variables as
supported by a Chi square of 7.520 with a p-value of .583 for temperament and
chi square value of 3.274 with a p-value of .351 for brain dominance. Since a p-
value of greater than .05 (p=.583 >.05 and p=.351 > .05) indicates that the
relationship between these two variables is not significant. This implied that the
48
temperament and brain dominance of the teachers did not affect their teaching
styles.
Findings
After the analysis and interpretation of data, this study generated the
following results:
1. The melancholic temperament has the most number which consisted of 12 or
36.7 % out of 30 respondents.
2. Among 30 teachers 17 or (56.7 %) are left brain dominant.
3. The expert style has the most number which consists of 11 or 36.7 % out of 30
respondents.
4. There was no significant relationship between temperament and teaching
styles and brain dominance and teaching styles as supported by a Chi square of
7.520 with a p-value of .583 for temperament and chi square value of 3.274 with
a p-value of .351 for brain dominance. Since a p-value of greater than .05
(p=.583 >.05 and p=.351 > .05) indicates that the relationship between these two
variables is not significant.
49
Conclusions
Based on the findings the following conclusions were made:
1. The English teachers are predominantly melancholic.
2. The English teachers are predominantly left brain.
3. The English teachers are predominantly belonged to expert style of teaching.
4. The teachers temperament and brain dominance were not related to their
teaching styles.
Recommendations
Based on the findings the following recommendations were made:
1. Further studies about teaching style should be conducted; a teaching style and
learning correlation maybe or teaching styles of a content teacher.
2. Teachers should consider the temperaments of the students and apply the
best teaching style that fits their students.
3. Other studies about teaching styles and learning styles should be conducted to
know if these factors can help in learning English as second language.
4. Replication of this study using other variables not used in this investigation is
also recommended.
50
References
Abatayo, A. (2012). Temperament and Brain Dominance among BSED English
students in Mindanao State University, General Santos City. A.Y 2011-
2012. Unpublished Thesis, Mindanao State University, G.S.C
Akbari, R., Kiany, G.R., Naeeni, M.I., & Allvar, N. K. (2009). Teachers teaching
styles, sense of efficacy and reflectivity as correlates with students
achievement outcomes. System, 35(2),197-207.
Barnes, R., & Aguerreebere, J. (2006, November 15). Sidetracking the debate on
teacher quality. Education Week, 26(12), 34, 44
Berks, D. (2000). Please understand me: Character and temperament types (5 th
edition). Del Mar, CA: Prometheus Nemesis
Bester, E.D. (2011). The potential link between brain dominance and
temperament, learning and personality styles: a personal and professional
leadership perspective. Rand Afrikans University.
Beyond Crossroads. (2006). Effective mathematics instruction. New York,
NY:Sage
Boeree, C.G (1997). Personality theories. Utah Valley University Press
Brown, H. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching (3 rd ed.).
N.Y.U.S.A.
Brown, R. (1972). Psycholinguistics. Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.,
N.
Brown, B. L. (2003). Teaching syle vs. learning style: Myths and realities.
Columbus,OH: The Ohio State University.
51
Chadda. N.K. (1991)” A Factorial Analytical study of Verbal creativity,
Temperament and Frustration”, Psycho lingua, Vol. 21(2) pp. 61-62.
Conti, G.J., & Wellborn, R. B. (1986). Teaching-learning styles and the dult
learner. Lifelong Learning, 9(8), 20-24.
Dunn, R.S., & Dunn, K. J. (1979). Learning styles/teaching styles: Should they …
can they . . . be matched? Educational Leadership, 36(4), 238-244.
Enomoto L. (2000). Improving Academic Success with right-Brain Learning
Methods. 20400 Stevens Creek Boulevard, 6th floor, Cupertino, California.
Farkas, R. D. (2003). Effects of traditional versus learning-styles instructional
methods on middle school students. The Journal of Education Research,
97 (1), 42-51.
Fischer, B., & Fischer, L. (1979). Styles in teaching and learning. Educational
Leadership, 36, 345-361.
Findell,(2011). What differentiates expert teachers from others?. Retrieved March
2, 2016) from (http://www.bu.edu/jurnalofeducation/files/2011/06/BUJOE-
188.2Findell.pdf)
Fourie, J. (1997). The principles of linguistic philosophy. St. Martins press, N.Y.
Frias, C. J. (2013). Temperament and brain dominance among AB English
freshmen of Mindanao State University, General Santos city, A.Y. 2013-
2014. Unpublished Thesis, Mindanao State University, G.S.C.
Genc, E., & Ogan-Bekiroglu, F. (2004). Patterns in teaching styles of science
teachers in Florida and factors influencing their preferences. Retrieved
November 16, 2015 from
52
(http://www.ric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=Ed4907
81.
Grasha, A.F. (1994). A matter of style: the teacher as expert, personal model,
facilitator, and delegator. College Teaching, 42 (4), 12.
Grasha, A.F. (1996). Teaching with style. Pittsburgh, PA: Alliance Publishers.
Grasha, A.E. (2002). Teaching with style: a practical guide to enhancing learning
by understanding teaching and learning styles. San Bernadino, CA;
Alliance.
Gregorc, A. F. (1979). Learning/teaching styls; potent forces behind them.
Educational Leadership, 36(4),234=236.
Hermann, R. (2006). Sociolinguistics: a critical survey of theory and application.
New York Plenum Press, N.Y.
Hortons, Connie Burrows Four Temperaments. Retrieved October 19, 2015 from
(http://fisheaters.com/fourtemperaments.html)
Husch, D.S. history of the brain. Retrieved October 10, 2015 from
(http://wikepedia.org/wiki.Historyofthebrain).
Hughes, G.B. (2009). Students perceptions of teaching styles in mathematics
learning environments. Mathematics Teaching Research Journal Online,
3(2), 1-12.
Holbrook, Left Brain vs Right Brain Teaching Techniques. Retrieved March 2,
2016 from (http://www.funderstanding.com/brain/left-brain-vs-rght-brain-
teaching-techniques/)
53
Jarvis, P. (2004). Adult education and lifelong learning: Theory and Practice.
London, United Kingdom: Routledge Falmer.
Keogh, Barbara. Temperament in the classroom: Helping each child find a good
fit. Retrieved March, 2016 from
(http://.greatschools.org/gk/atickles/temperament-in-the-classroom-
helping-each-child-find-a-good-fit/)
LaHaye, T. (1983). Spirit controlled-temperament. Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale
House Publishers
LaHaye, T. (1984). Your temperament discover its potential.
Wheaton,TyndaleHouse Publishers
Maclean, P. D. (1990). The triune brain eolution, role in paeocerebral functions.
New York Plenum Press
McCombs, B. L., & Miller, L. (2007). Learner-centered classroom practices and
assessments: maximizing student motivation, learning and achievement.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Montgomery, R. (2002). People Patterns: a modern guide to the four
temperaments. New York: Archer Books.
Myers, I.B. (1987). Introduction to type: A Description of the Theory and
Application of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, 4th Ed. Palo Alto,
California, Consulting Psychologist Press, Inc.
Neuroscience for Kids. Retrieved March 2, 2016 from
(http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/split.htm)
54
Official Website of Paul Mclean’s triune model. Retrived September 23, 2015
from (http://www.kheper.au.com/gaia/intelligence/McLean.htm)
Pennebeker, J.W., & King, L.A. (1999). Linguistic styles: Language use as an
individual difference. Journal of Personality and social Psychology.
Peter, h. Right or Left Brain. Retrieved September 23, 2015 from
(http://blogthings.com/areyourightorleftbrainquiz/)
Salamani, M. (2011). Temperament as an indicator of language achievement.
Iran Encyclopedia Compiling foundation.
Singh Bhu Dev (1989)” the relative potential of selected temperamental
characteristics as predictors of creativity”, Indian Journal of Psychometry
and Education (Jan) Vol 20 (1), pp, 45-51.
Springer, L., Stanne, M.E., & Donovan, S.S. (1999). Effects of small-group
learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and
technology: A metaanalysis. Review of Educational Research, 69 (1), 21-
51.
Stitt-Gohdes, W.L. (2001), Business Education Students Preferred Learning
Styles and Their Teachers Preferred Instructional Styles: Do they Match?
Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 43(3),137-151.
Valensik, Christine, Chrosky, James C. and Richman Virginia P. (2010) “
Temperament and Socio Communicative Orientation.” Communication
Research Report, 17, pp. 114-115
Websters Universal English Dictionary (2008). Manila, Phils., WS Pacific
Publications, Inc.
55
Westers, L. Learning styles. Retrieved Septmber 23, 2015 from (
http://www.learning-styles-online.com/overview/).
Zhen C. (2012). Characteristics and strategies of Literature teaching in the ELF
context in China.
56
APPENDICES
57
Mindanao State University

General Santos City
College of Social Sciences and Humanities
January 27, 2016
Leonardo B. Genoguin
Principal
General Santos City National High School
Calumpang, General Santos City
Sir:
Good day!
I am conducting my undergraduate thesis entitled “Temperament, Brain

Dominance and Teaching Style among English Teachers”. In line with this, may I
ask permission to allow me to conduct the tests to the teachers. Moreover, may I
also ask from you a list of English teachers from this school.
Rest assured that the data collected will be treated with confidentiality.
Thank you and God Bless.
Noted by: Sincerely yours,

Prof. Salvacion Santander Melissa C. Confesor
Adviser Researcher
58
Temperament Test
Please answer the following questions on the answer sheet.

Below are the descriptive words, answer the following by scaling each item that
best describes you. The number is scaled from 1 which indicates least like you
and 5 indicates most like you. You may also use 2, 3, and 4 accordingly.
Section 1 Section 2
1. Emotional 1. Optimistic
2. Egotistical 2. Determined
3. Interrupt others 3. Bossy
4. Compassionate 4. Goal-oriented
5. Impulsive 5. Decisive
6. Disorganize 6. Frank
7. Impractical 7. Self-confident
8. Funny 8. Sarcastic
9. Forgetful 9. Workaholic
10. Easily discouraged 10. Self-sufficient
11. Very positive 11. Practical
12. Easily angered 12. Headstrong
13. Undisciplined 13. Activist
14 Extrovert 14. Outgoing
15 Refreshing 15. Adventurous
16. Lively/spirited 16.omineering
17. Weak-willed 17. Aggressive
18. Spontaneous 18. Competitive
19. Talkative 19. Leadership ability
20. Delightful/cheerful 20. Daring
21. Enjoyable 21. Persevering
22. Popular 22. Bold
23. Friendly/sociable 23. Strong-willed
24. Bouncy 24. Persuasive
25. Restless 25. Hot-tempered
26. Difficulty concentrating 26. Resourceful
27. Likes to play 27. Insensitive
28. Difficulty keeping resolutions 28. Outspoken
29. Lives in present 29. Unsympathetic
30. Difficulty keeping resolutions 30. Productive
59
Section 3 Section 4
1. Deep feeling 1. Very quiet

2. Critical 2. Selfish
3. Insecure 3. Unenthusiastic
4. Sensitive 4. Negative
5. Indecisive 5. Regular daily habits
6. Hard to please 6. Hesitant
7. Self-centered 7. Shy
8. Pessimistic 8. Stingy
9. Depressed easily 9. Aimless
10. Easily offended 10. Not aggressive
11. Idealistic 11. Stubborn
12. Loner 12. Worrier
13. Self-sacrificing 13. Spectator of life
14. Introvert 14. Works well under pressure
15. Faithful friend 15. Indecisive
16. Analytical 16. Adaptable
17. Considerate 17. Slow and lazy
18. Likes behind the scene 18. Submissive to others
19. Suspicious 19. Easy going
20. Respectful 20. Reserved
21. Introspective 21. Calm and cool
22. Planner 22. Content/satisfied
23. Perfectionist 23. Efficient
24. Scheduled 24. Patient
25. Unforgiving/resents 25. Dependable
26. Orderly 26. Listener
27. Creative 27. Witty/dry humor
28. Detailed 28. Pleasant
29. Moody 29. Teases others
30. Gifted 30. Consistent
(musically/athletically)
60
Brain Dominance Test
In each number, write Y for Yes if the sentence below describes you and N for
No if it does not describes you.
______1. I constantly look at the clock.
______2. I keep a journal or diary of my thoughts.
______3. I believe there is an either right or wrong way to do everything.
______4. I find it hard to follow direction precisely.
______5. The expression “ Life is just a bowl of cherries” makes no sense to me.
______6. I frequently change my plans and find that sticking to a schedule is
boring.
______7. I think it’s easier to draw a map than to tell someone how to get
somewhere.
______8. To find a lost item, I try to picture it in my head where I last saw it.
______9. I frequently let my emotions guide me.
______10. I learn Math with ease.
______11. I’d read the directions before assembling something.
______12. People tell me I am always late getting places.
______13. People have told me that I am a psychic.
______14. I need to set goals for myself to keep me on track.
______15. When somebody asks me a question, I turn my head to the left.
______16. If I have a tough decision to make, I write down the pros and cons.
______17. I’d probably make a good detective.
61
______18. I learn music with ease.
______19. To solve a problem, I think of similar problems I have solved in the
past.
______20. I use a lot of gestures.
______21. If someone asks me a question, I turn my head to the right.
______22. I believe there are two ways to look at almost everything.
______23. I have the ability to tell if people are lying or guilty of something.
______24. I keep a “to do list”.
______25. I am able to thoroughly explain my opinions in words.
______26. In a debate, I am objective and look at the facts before forming an
opinion.
______27. I’ve considered becoming a poet, a politician, an architect, or a
dancer.
______28. I always lose track of time.
______29. When trying to remember name I forgot, I’d recite the alphabet until I
remembered it.
______30. I like to draw.
______32. When I’m confused, I usually go with my gut instinct.
62
Teaching Style Test
Respond to each of the items below in terms of how you teach by using the
following rating scale: 1=strongly disagree, 2=moderately disagree, 3=undecided,
4=moderately agree and 5=strongly agree.
Please try to answer as honestly and as objectively as you can. Resist the
temptation to respond as you believe you should or ought to think or behave.
______1. Facts, concepts and principles are the most important things that
student should acquire.
______2. I set high standards for student in class.
______3. What I say and do models appropriate ways for student to think about
issues in the content.
______4. My teaching goals and methods address a variety of student learning
style.
______5. Student typically works on course projects alone with little supervision
from me.
______6. Sharing my knowledge and expertise with students is very important to
me.
______7. I give students negative feedback when their performance is
unsatisfactory.
______8. Activities in class encourage students to develop their own ideas about
content issues.
63
______9. I spend time consulting with students to develop their own ideas about
content issues.
______10. Activities in class encourage students to develop their own i deas
about content issues.
______11. What I have to say about a topic is important for student to acquire a
broader perspective on the issues in that area.
______12. Students would describe my standards and expectation as somewhat
strict and rigid.
______13. I typically show students how and what to do I order to master course
content.
______14. Small group discussions are employed to help students develop their
ability to think critically.
______15. Students design one of more self-directed learning experiences.
______16. I want students to leave in class well prepared for further work in the
area.
______17. It is my responsibility to define what student must learn and how
should they learn it.
______18. Examples from my personal experiences often are used to illustrate
points about a material.
______19. I guide student work on course projects by asking questions,
exploring options, and suggesting alternative ways to do things.
______20. Developing the ability of students to think and work independently is
an important goal.
64
______21. Lecturing is a significant part of how I teach each class.
______22. I provide very clear guidelines for how I want tasks completed in
class.
______23. I often show students how they can use various principles and
concepts.
______24. Course activities encourage students to take initiative and
responsibility for their learning.
______25. Students take responsibility for teaching part of the class sessions.
______26. My expertise is typically used to resolve disagreements about content
issues.
______27. This course has very specific goals and objectives that I want to
accomplish.
______28. Students’ receive frequent verbal and/or written comments on their
performance.
______29. I solicit student advice about how and what to each in class.
______30. Student set their own pace for completing independent or group
projects.
______31. Student might describe me as a “storehouse of knowledge” who
dispenses the fact, principles, and concepts they need.
______32. My expectations for what I want students to do in class are clearly
defined in the syllabus.
______33. Eventually, many students begin to think like me about course
content.
65
______34. Students can make choices among activities in order to complete
course requirements.
______35. My approach to teaching is similar to a manager of work group who
delegates task and responsibilities to subordinates.
______36. There is more material in this course than I have time available to
cover it.
______37. My standards and expectations help students develop the discipline
they need to learn.
______38. Students might describe me as a “coach” who works closely with
someone to correct problems in how they think and behave.
______39. I give students a lot of personal support and encouragement to do
well in this course.
______40. I assume the role of a resource person who is available to students
whenever they need help.
66
Temperaments
Respondents Choleric Melancholic Sanguine Phlegmatic

1 107 108 126 105
2 71 86 79 90
3 99 96 103 98
4 80 137 113 89
5 95 103 83 95
6 94 112 81 81
7 102 104 98 101
8 119 117 86 77
9 103 101 126 105
10 81 92 77 90
11 70 79 76 81
12 96 82 72 67
13 104 106 95 89
14 96 99 84 87
15 92 90 81 79
16 76 84 93 87
17 97 91 89 103
18 83 79 110 99
19 96 115 103 101
20 109 123 99 112
21 90 91 89 96
22 104 95 87 98
23 111 106 121 117
24 82 79 74 87
25 98 86 90 83
26 102 95 99 106
27 89 97 91 96
28 106 94 87 94
29 92 79 86 81
30 84 106 98 77
Total ∑2,828 ∑2,932 ∑2,796 ∑2,771
67
Teaching Style
Respondents Expert Personal model facilitator Delegator

1 39 45 36 40
2 37 39 43 36
3 42 41 36 44
4 40 41 44 38
5 40 36 35 41
6 38 37 35 43
7 48 43 47 43
8 38 40 42 38
9 40 39 38 36
10 43 40 39 41
11 38 37 40 36
12 42 36 38 40
13 35 36 40 33
14 39 37 43 36
15 38 35 37 45
16 43 40 40 39
17 42 45 36 40
18 40 46 36 47
19 35 37 43 40
20 48 45 42 45
21 48 44 36 35
22 39 41 37 42
23 40 38 39 38
24 40 36 40 41
25 35 43 40 40
26 44 36 35 40
27 36 41 39 36
28 36 43 38 38
29 40 43 38 39
30 42 41 37 40
Total ∑1,205 ∑1,201 ∑1,169 ∑1,190
68
Correlations
choleric melan sanguine phleg temperament

* * **
Pearson Correlation 1 .422 .352 .372 .692
choleric Sig. (2-tailed) .020 .057 .043 .000
N 30 30 30 30 30
* * **
Pearson Correlation .422 1 .463 .277 .738
melan Sig. (2-tailed) .020 .010 .138 .000
N 30 30 30 30 30
* ** **
Pearson Correlation .352 .463 1 .659 .834
sanguine Sig. (2-tailed) .057 .010 .000 .000
N 30 30 30 30 30
* ** **
Pearson Correlation .372 .277 .659 1 .747
phleg Sig. (2-tailed) .043 .138 .000 .000
N 30 30 30 30 30
** ** ** **
Pearson Correlation .692 .738 .834 .747 1
temperament Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000
N 30 30 30 30 30
Pearson Correlation .105 .123 .057 .286 .180
tstyle Sig. (2-tailed) .581 .516 .766 .126 .342
N 30 30 30 30 30
Correlations
tstyle
Pearson Correlation .105
choleric Sig. (2-tailed) .581
N 30
*
melan Sig. (2-tailed) .516
N 30
sanguine Sig. (2-tailed) .766
N 30
*
phleg Sig. (2-tailed) .126
N 30
**
temperament
Sig. (2-tailed) .342
69
N 30
Pearson Correlation 1
tstyle Sig. (2-tailed)
N 30
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
CORRELATIONS
/VARIABLES=left right brain tstyle
/PRINT=TWOTA IL NOSIG
/STATISTICS DESCRIPTIVES
/MISSING=PAIRWISE.
Correlations
Notes
Output Created 25-MAR-2016 21:40:48
Comments
C:\Users\totodisca1960\D
Data ocuments\melissa
confesor.sav
Active Dataset DataSet1
Input Filter <none>
Weight <none>
Split File <none>
N of Rows in Working
30
Data File
User-defined missing
Definition of Missing values are treated as
missing.
Missing Value Handling Statistics for each pair of
variables are based on all
Cases Used
the cases with valid data
for that pair.
CORRELATIONS
/VARIABLES=left right
brain tstyle
/PRINT=TWOTA IL
Syntax
NOSIG
/STATISTICS
DESCRIPTIVES
/MISSING=PAIRWISE.
70
Processor Time 00:00:00.03

Resources
Elapsed Time 00:00:00.06
[DataSet1] C:\Users\totodisca1960\Documents\melissa confesor.sav
Descriptive Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N
left 16.23 3.329 30
right 15.77 3.329 30
brain 1.43 .504 30
tstyle 39.71 2.193 30
Correlations
left right brain tstyle
** **
Pearson Correlation 1 -1.000 -.864 -.276
left Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .140
N 30 30 30 30
** **
Pearson Correlation -1.000 1 .864 .276
right Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .140
N 30 30 30 30
** **
Pearson Correlation -.864 .864 1 .134
brain Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .481
N 30 30 30 30
Pearson Correlation -.276 .276 .134 1
tstyle Sig. (2-tailed) .140 .140 .481
N 30 30 30 30
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
CROSSTABS
/TABLES=tempera BY teachings
/FORMAT=AVALUE TABLES
/STATISTICS =CHISQ
/CELLS=COUNT
/COUNT ROUND CELL.
71
Crosstabs
Notes
Comments
confesor.sav
Input Filter <none>
Weight <none>
Split File <none>
30
Data File
missing.
Statistics for each table
Missing Value Handling
are based on all the cases
Cases Used with valid data in the
specified range(s) for all
variables in each table.
CROSSTABS
/TABLES=tempera BY
teachings
/FORMAT=AVALUE
Syntax
TABLES
/STATISTICS= CHISQ
/CELLS=COUNT
/COUNT ROUND CELL.
Resources
Dimensions Requested 2
Cells Available 174762

Case Processing Summary
Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
72
tempera * teachings 30 100.0% 0 0.0% 30 100.0%
tempera * teachings Crosstabulation

Count
teachings Total
1 2 3 4
1 1 3 1 2 7
2 4 1 3 3 11
tempera
3 4 1 0 1 6
4 2 1 2 1 6
Total 11 6 6 7 30
Chi-Square Tests
Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
a
Pearson Chi-Square 7.520 9 .583
Likelihood Ratio 8.348 9 .499
Linear-by-Linear
.584 1 .445
Association
N of Valid Cases 30
a. 16 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The

minimum expected count is 1.20.
CROSSTABS
/TABLES=brain BY teachings
/FORMAT=AVALUE TABLES
/STATISTICS= CHISQ
/CELLS=COUNT
/COUNT ROUND CELL.
Crosstabs
Notes
Comments
Input confesor.sav
Filter <none>
73
Weight <none>
Split File <none>
30
Data File
missing.
Statistics for each table
Missing Value Handling
are based on all the cases
Cases Used with valid data in the
specified range(s) for all
variables in each table.
CROSSTABS
/TABLES=brain BY
teachings
/FORMAT=AVALUE
Syntax
TABLES
/STATISTICS= CHISQ
/CELLS=COUNT
/COUNT ROUND CELL.
Resources
Dimensions Requested 2
Cells Available 174762

Case Processing Summary
Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
brain * teachings 30 100.0% 0 0.0% 30 100.0%
brain * teachings Crosstabulation

Count
teachings Total
1 2 3 4
brain 1 8 2 4 3 17
74
2 3 4 2 4 13
Total 11 6 6 7 30
Chi-Square Tests
sided)
a
Linear-by-Linear
.894 1 .344
Association
N of Valid Cases 30
a. 7 cells (87.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum

expected count is 2.60.
teachings * brain
Crosstab
Count
brain Total
1 2
1 8 3 11
2 2 4 6
teachings
3 4 2 6
4 3 4 7
Total 17 13 30
Chi-Square Tests
sided)
a
Linear-by-Linear
.894 1 .344
Association
N of Valid Cases 30
a. 7 cells (87.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum

expected count is 2.60.
teachings * tempera
Crosstab
Count
75
tempera Total
1 2 3 4
1 1 4 4 2 11
2 3 1 1 1 6
teachings
3 1 3 0 2 6
4 2 3 1 1 7
Total 7 11 6 6 30
Chi-Square Tests
sided)
a
Linear-by-Linear
.584 1 .445
Association
N of Valid Cases 30
a. 16 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The

minimum expected count is 1.20.
CORRELATIONS
/VARIABLES=choleric melan sanguine phleg temperament tstyle
/PRINT=TWOTA IL NOSIG
/MISSING=PAIRWISE.
76
Curriculum Vitae
Name: Melissa C. Confesor
N-name: Mel, Lis, Melai
Age: 23 Sex: female
B-day: Oct. 19, 1992
Address: Prk. San Roque Labangal G.S.C
Educational Background
Saavedra Saway Elem. School 2005
General Santos City High School 2009
Mindanao State University 2016
Degree: Bachelor of Arts in English
Parents:
Mr. Edgar G. Confesor
Mrs. Lene C. Confesor
Siblings:
Lesther C. Confesor
Joven C. Confesor
LoveJoy C. Confesor
Motto:
“Contented for less, yet aiming for more”.
77

Temperament, Brain Dominance, and Teaching Style Among English Teachers

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Temperament, Brain Dominance, and Teaching Style Among English Teachers

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

TEMPERAMENTS, BRAIN DOMINANCE, AND TEACHING STYLES AMONG

Presented to the Faculty of the English Department

College of Social Science and Humanities

Mindanao State University

General Santos City

Of the Requirements for the Degree of

Bachelor of Arts in English

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES

SALVACION B. SANTANDER, M.I.E

MELY B. SUBIERE, MAEd-TESL

ROSSEL M. AUDENCIAL, M.I.E SALVACION B. SANTANDER,

Accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

LORENZO L. LAROCO, M.A.T. MAULAWI L. CALIMBA, M.A.

This study aimed to identify the correlation between temperaments, brain

Keywords: Temperaments, Brain dominance, Teaching style, Dominance,

1 THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

2 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF

5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 37

A Letter for the Respondents

C Brain Dominance Test

D Teaching Style Test

A Schematic Diagram of Conceptual Framework

B Summary of Temperaments of the Respondents

C Summary of Brain Dominance of the Respondents

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

Definition of Terms, which provides the conceptual and operational definitions of

important terms that were be used in the study.

Person’s temperament often stimulates consistent reactions from other

temperament is influenced by the people children interact with, it is critical that

defined as stable, individual differences in both the intensity and quality of

emotional reaction (Goldsmith et al, 1987). Therefore, it is important to address

how individual temperaments, those of students and teachers, contribute to

children’s learning and achievement.

effect on studying skills, homework, habits and grades. Understanding whether

student’s learning style is helpful to parents, teachers, tutors and most

Effective teachers allow students the opportunity to interact, learn,

achievement and teaching (Barnes & Aguerrebere, 2006). Research suggests

motivational (McCombs & Miller, 2007).

To expand her learnings about these factors in second language

communicate with students having different temperamental predisposition which

somehow related to this study. By considering these factors the researcher

understand their temperamental predisposition, brain dominance and its relation

Statement of the Problem

This study determined the temperaments, brain dominance and teaching

(GSCNHS), Labangal National High School and Fatima High School.

Specifically, this study answered the following questions:

1. What is the dominant temperament of the teachers according to LaHaye’s

2. What is the brain dominance of the teachers according to Brown’s

3. What is the dominant teaching style of the teachers according to Grasha’s

4. What is the correlation of temperament and brain dominance of the

respondents to their teaching styles?

Scope and Delimitation

This study focused on the temperament, brain dominance and teaching

respondents according to the theories formulated by Hippocrates and developed

by LaHaye which are the following: sanguine, choleric, melancholic and

Through the determined temperament and brain dominance of the respondents

following: facilitator, personal model, delegator, and expert.

Significance of the Study

This study may be of great help to the following.

community in knowing how a certain personality of a person may affect his

capability in performing different tasks. More so, it may seriously contribute to