Reconnoitering the factors that may impact the academic achievement of learn ers is relevant for instructional scientists. The absence of knowledge of this likely connection with teachers and learners can lead to discouragement of the further perseverance of language learners. The present study seeks to define the prevalence of personality types and learning styles in Bangladeshi context as well as to address the impact of traits and styles on the samples (N = 676). A cross-sectional quantitative research design was used for this study and self-reported BFI questionnaire, VARK questionnaire and an achievement test were used for collecting relevant data. Analysis of data shows that Agreeable is the most dominant trait for both boys and girls. Again, boys prefer multiple learning styles (multimodal) whereas girls prefer Auditory. In this study , some demographic factors, personality traits and learning styles of the learners were discovered to have an important connection with GPA. Study results indicate that there is a statistically significant association between Multimodal and academic achievement. At the same time, the relationship between the trait extraversion and EFL learners, English language achievement is also found statistically significant. The results of the research questions are highly expected to offer educators some idea of amending the country’s state of affairs in terms of EFL teaching and learning not just in Bangladesh but in other non-English nations as well. Further study can be done in exploring the learning styles and personality traits of the teachers as it is observed in previous studies that these are significantly related to the academic excellence.
Probably the shortest question that has an immense answer is “How do people learn?” Some learn thoughtfully whilst others process information more superficially and they differ in their information processing, organizing, recalling and applying [
The quality of the thinking of learners is critical to learning, and their academic achievement could possibly be ascertained [
Interest in personality studies has risen over the previous few centuries, so personality psychologists have created a measuring tool called the Five Factor Model (FFM) Personality Inventory using factor analysis based on adjective-driven issues [
The five main features of the Big Five are: Openness to Experience, Awareness, Extraversion-Introversion, Compatibility, and Neuroticism-Emotional Stability [
Various educators, psychologists and scientists have studied the notion of teaching-learning styles, whereas learning styles is a word used to advert to data collection, handling, interpretation, organization and thinking techniques. In education there are many models of learning styles, such as Howard Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences Theory (1999), David Kolb’s Learning Styles (1984), Albert Bandura’s Theory (1977), Carl Jung’s Theory of Personality Types (1921) [
The discovery of the Big Five personality variables in linguistic information resulted in the structural assessment of questionnaires and other personality tools, tools that may or may not be specifically intended to evaluate these factors [
Students and learners of the EFL language do not likewise receive new data. Just as we look, behave and feel differently, so we are distinct in the manner we learn. Every individual has a style of learning. Students have distinct learning styles, which is the reason for the diversity of how learners acquire a foreign language, such as English, seen in schools. Language learning strategies are learners’ particular behaviors or methods that facilitate any portion of their own language development [
Since the end of the twentieth century, how personality correlates with academic performance has become increasingly interesting and many studies are undertaken in distinct country contexts on personality traits, learning styles and English language accomplishment [
In this age of globalization, English has created itself as a worldwide language as it is able to create a unique position that is acknowledged in every nation. English has accomplished this worldwide status because nations either make it an official language or give unique priority to studying it as a foreign language [
Secondary education in Bangladesh includes grades 6 through 12 education or the second phase of education that begins after primary education and continues to higher education begins. English is a major foreign language course in all of the country’s high school grades. The nation has shifted from a long-term Grammar Translation Method to a Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) method for EFL teaching [
Al-Qaisy & Khuffash [
The education policy makers, teachers and parents should study personality in order to comprehend the learning requirements and identify the individual learning style and create strategies for learning and teaching purposes which will provide learners with a more fruitful learning and educational setting. This study will generate a significant body of empirical data, which will lead to greater understanding of how personality traits and learning style relate to the academic achievement of EFL learner’s academic achievement. Teacher educators, student teachers and current teachers of Bangladesh can gain valuable direction from the findings of this research ameliorate their own teaching styles. The findings will also show a chance for educators to evaluate themselves about their role in the learning system, reflect on their own instruction styles, and give them a precious understanding that could make them even better teachers in the future.
What types of personality traits and learning styles does exist among secondary level students of Bangladesh? Are there any significant differences among the learning styles according to school types and school locations? Is there any significant impact of demographic factors, learning styles, and personality traits on English language achievement? Considering these three questions, this research was conducted to investigate the impact of two non-cognitive academic achievement factors (personality traits and learning styles) on Bangladeshi EFL secondary-level learners.
For this study, a descriptive research design was adopted in which descriptive research involves surveys and factual results of various types [
Because of availability of time, financial supports and communication system, the Researcher selected two districts from Chittagong divisions (Second largest division of the country among seven) for the study to fulfill its purpose.
The aim of quantitative research is to collect and generalize numerical data across groups of individuals or explaining a specific phenomenon [
Bangladeshi students from main streaming secondary level of Education were considered as the population of this study. According to Bangladesh Bureau of Educational Information and Statistics-BANBEIS [
The overall study was conducted among secondary students of Bangladesh. Thus, all the secondary students are in the sampling frame of the study. By using n = Z2pq/d2 formula of sample size was calculated. Using this formula the total of 384 students was selected by taking 50% prevalence (because the researcher found no reliable source for prevalence for secondary students’ personality traits or learning styles from Bangladesh). By adding 0.5 times for the design effect it became (384 + 192) 576 and then considering 20% non-respondent error the total respondent was (576 + 115) 691 and finally, after rounding up the sample were 676. This 676 students from selected four schools (two from each district) were participated chosen as respondents for this study and they were selected randomly during data collection. Class X was selected purposefully to represent the secondary level. The 29.1% respondents were from government schools, whereas the rate of semi-government and non-government were 30.4% and 40.5% respectively. Most of the (70.7%) schools were located in urban area. The semi-urban and rural school’s percentage were 17.4 and 11.9 respectively. Among the respondents the highest percent (68.3%) of respondent were female and the rest (31.7%) were male.
The primary strategy for collecting information was engaged using two questionnaires and an achievement test.
In this study, the Big Five Inventory (BFI) was administered to determine the personality traits of EFL learners for a robust measure of personality traits established by previous researchers John and Srivastava [
There’s a lot of techniques available to evaluate styles of learning, with each technique to provide a distinct perspective of the preferences of learning style. The technique used in this research describes the styles of learning preference based on the sensory procedure in which a student likes to acquire new information. In 1987, an educator Neil D. Fleming developed an inventory named VARK© inventory and an updated version was used (version 7.1) for determining the learning style preference of the respondents of this study. The VARK inventory is comprised with 16 items where each item has 4 multiple choice statements.
Level of English language achievement of the students has been confirmed through an achievement test, which is a paper-and-pencil tests in pattern. The test was adapted from the S.S.C. examination, 2017 of the Dhaka Education Board Moreover, the test was finalized with commendation of linguistics experts. The test comprises of 10 items including two free hand writing items. The test was marked out of 60. In addition, to measure the significance of the test, the researcher also collected the student’s most recent marks from their half yearly school exams of both English papers.
The following procedures were performed to assure the validity and reliability of the tools in the preliminary phase. First, the BFI and VARK inventory were translated into Bangla. For the purposes of this study, an expert who had at least five years of proved experience in English translation was asked to consider the complexity and suitability of the inventory text and the language used. Some Bangla wording was adopted based on her feedback to assist, explain the significance of the inventory.
Second, both English I and II question papers of Dhaka Board S.S.C. examination, 2017 were collected and adapted. English experts were then asked to consider the face validity, the validity of the content, and the complexity and suitability of the exam. Experts were characterized as skilled linguistics experts for this assignment, one of them had taught English as a mandatory course at the Institute of Education and Research, University of Dhaka, and another one had at least five years of secondary level EFL teaching experience.
Third, a pilot project was initiated at two Dhaka district schools to evaluate the validity and reliability of the tools and the feasibility of research design and data collection processes. Forty students of Class X, twenty from each school, who learn English as a compulsory subject under national curriculum, participated in the pilot project and they were not intromitted among the research subject. They had to give feedback on the transience and limpidity of the phrasing and directions as well as the appropriateness of the time requirement in accordance with completing the questionnaires and test.
The internal consistency reliability for the BFI questionnaire were adequate (mean α value were 0.70) whereas the for the VARK questionnaire α value were 0.58.
Shapiro-Wilk test, Kolmogrove-Smirnove test, T-test, Post-hoc test (LSD) and stepwise multiple regression analysis were done to analyze the data for addressing the research questions. SPSS 25.0 was used for analyzing data.
Prior permission from the school authority as well as the guardian of the respondents were taken. At the same time, the researcher was responsible for data confidentiality and ensuring that the information were not used for any purpose other than that agreed by the respondents. Moreover, the researcher was concerned about not to cause any inconvenience to the scheduled classes during data collection.
The following sections will demonstrate the findings of the study based on the responses of the respondent.
RQ1: What types of personality traits and learning styles exist among secondary level students of Bangladesh?
Among the respondents the highest portion (51.48%) preferred to learn through a combination of modalities known as Multimodal learning and the lowest portion (2.81%) preferred to learn through Visual learning. Besides, the rest of the respondents preferred to learn through Auditory, Read/Write and Kinesthetic, the rate was 19.82%, 8.28% and 17.60% respectively. Among them the highest rate was observed for the trait Agreeableness and the lowest to Neuroticism, rates were 31.36% and 4.14% respectively. Conscientiousness reported to the second highest (30.77%) whilst Openness and Extraversion rates were 20.27% and 13.46% respectively. English Language Achievement scores mean and SD are 55.28 ± 19.54 with a maximum of 98.0 and a minimum of 2.0.
Variables | Prevalence | M | SD | Minimum | Maximum | Skewness | Kurtosis |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Personality Traits | |||||||
Openness | 20.27 | 3.67 | 0.54 | 1.30 | 4.90 | −0.55 | 0.57 |
Consciousness | 30.77 | 3.69 | 0.64 | 1.67 | 5.00 | −0.37 | −0.17 |
Extraversion | 13.46 | 3.45 | 0.59 | 1.13 | 5.00 | −0.36 | 0.43 |
Agreeableness | 31.36 | 3.86 | 0.49 | 2.11 | 5.00 | −0.29 | 0.12 |
Neuroticism | 4.14 | 2.56 | 0.73 | 1.00 | 4.88 | 0.42 | −0.33 |
Learning Styles | |||||||
Visual | 2.81 | 1.93 | 1.58 | 0.00 | 8.00 | 0.82 | 0.71 |
Auditory | 19.82 | 3.48 | 2.22 | 0.00 | 11.00 | 0.32 | −0.47 |
Read/Write | 8.28 | 2.52 | 1.97 | 0.00 | 8.00 | 0.48 | −0.59 |
Kinesthetic | 17.60 | 3.37 | 2.06 | 0.00 | 9.00 | 0.05 | −0.84 |
Multimodal | 51.48 | 4.68 | 5.44 | 0.00 | 16.00 | 0.72 | −0.95 |
Academic Achievement | |||||||
English Language Achievement | 55.28 | 19.54 | 2.00 | 98.00 | −0.36 | −0.63 |
Variables | Boys | Girls | t | 95% confidence interval | d | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M | SD | M | SD | Lower | Upper | |||
Personality Traits | ||||||||
Openness | 3.69 | 0.58 | 3.66 | 0.52 | 0.53 | −0.06 | 0.11 | 0.06 |
Conscientiousness | 3.63 | 0.66 | 3.73 | 0.62 | −1.94 | −0.20 | 0.00 | −0.16 |
Extraversion | 3.33 | 0.59 | 3.51 | 0.58 | −3.77** | −0.27 | −0.08 | −0.31 |
Agreeableness | 3.79 | 0.54 | 3.89 | 0.45 | −2.83** | −0.19 | −0.03 | −0.21 |
Neuroticism | 2.55 | 0.70 | 2.56 | 0.75 | 0.06 | −0.12 | −0.11 | −0.01 |
Learning Styles | ||||||||
Visual | 1.74 | 1.65 | 2.034 | 1.53 | −2.38* | −0.55 | −0.05 | −0.19 |
Auditory | 2.93 | 2.26 | 3.79 | 2.14 | −4.94** | −1.21 | −0.52 | −0.39 |
Read/Write | 2.00 | 1.94 | 2.81 | 1.93 | −5.24** | −1.12 | −0.51 | −0.42 |
Kinesthetic | 2.98 | 2.20 | 3.59 | 1.95 | −3.78** | −0.94 | −0.30 | −0.30 |
Multimodal | 6.35 | 5.90 | 3.74 | 4.92 | 6.15** | 1.78 | 3.44 | 0.49 |
Academic Achievement | ||||||||
English Language Achievement | 57.56 | 18.45 | 53.99 | 20.02 | 2.29* | 0.50 | 6.63 | 0.18 |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
[−0.94, −0.30], effect size = −0.30) more than boys. Boys are more using multimodal learning strategy (t = 6.15, p < 0.01, 95% CI [1.78, 3.44], effect size = 0.49) than girls. Boys English language achievement is better than girls (t = 2.29, p < 0.05, 95% CI [0.50, 6.63], effect size = 0.18). Girls belong to the traits like Conscientiousness (t = −1.94, 95% CI [−0.06, −0.11], effect size = 0.06), Extraversion (t = −3.77, p < 0.01, 95% CI [−0.20, −0.00], effect size = −0.16), Agreeableness (t = −2.83, p < 0.01, 95% CI [−0.19, −0.03], effect size = −0.21), Neuroticism (t = 0.06, 95% CI [−0.12, −0.11], effect size = −0.01), more than boys. Boys belong to Openness (t = 0.53, 95% CI [−0.06, 0.11], effect size = 0.06) more than girls.
RQ2: Are there any significant differences among the learning styles according to school types and school locations?
Variables | School Location | School Types | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Urban | Semi-urban | Rural | Govt. | Non-govt. | Semi-govt. | ||
Visual | N | 519 | 93 | 64 | 189 | 263 | 224 |
M | 1.84 | 2.44 | 1.92 | 1.98 | 2.06 | 1.74 | |
SD | 1.56 | 1.70 | 1.43 | 1.47 | 1.71 | 1.51 | |
Auditory | N | 519 | 93 | 64 | 189 | 263 | 224 |
M | 3.34 | 4.59 | 3.02 | 3.72 | 3.78 | 2.93 | |
SD | 2.25 | 2.13 | 1.59 | 2.17 | 2.52 | 2.14 | |
Read/Write | N | 519 | 93 | 64 | 189 | 263 | 224 |
M | 2.38 | 3.69 | 2.00 | 2.81 | 2.86 | 1.88 | |
SD | 1.97 | 1.81 | 1.54 | 1.99 | 1.98 | 1.78 | |
Kinesthetic | N | 519 | 93 | 64 | 189 | 263 | 224 |
M | 3.24 | 4.46 | 2.84 | 3.53 | 3.74 | 2.80 | |
SD | 2.05 | 1.89 | 1.89 | 2.06 | 2.10 | 1.90 | |
Multimodal | N | 519 | 93 | 64 | 189 | 263 | 224 |
M | 5.19 | 0.80 | 6.22 | 3.94 | 3.53 | 6.66 | |
SD | 5.62 | 3.06 | 4.10 | 5.41 | 5.36 | 5.01 | |
English Language Achievement | N | 519 | 93 | 64 | 189 | 263 | 224 |
M | 59.71 | 37.04 | 45.81 | 60.21 | 49.15 | 58.30 | |
SD | 17.66 | 20.97 | 11.82 | 18.88 | 21.88 | 14.77 |
Variables | Group | School Location | School Type | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean Square | F | f | Mean Square | F | f | ||
Visual | Between | 14.33 | 5.81** | 0.13 | 6.54 | 2.63 | 0.09 |
Within | 2.47 | 2.49 | |||||
Auditory | Between | 69.21 | 14.59** | 0.21 | 50.96 | 10.62** | 0.18 |
Within | 4.74 | 4.80 | |||||
Read/Write | Between | 77.51 | 21.12** | 0.25 | 69.95 | 18.95** | 0.24 |
Within | 3.67 | 3.69 | |||||
Kinesthetic | Between | 68.68 | 16.90** | 0.22 | 57.20 | 13.96** | 0.20 |
Within | 4.063 | 4.097 | |||||
Multimodal | Between | 843.52 | 31.08** | 0.30 | 664.02 | 23.99** | 0.27 |
Within | 27.14 | 27.68 | |||||
English Language Achievement | Between | 23437.19 | 74.85** | 0.47 | 8255.97 | 23.05** | 0.26 |
Within | 313.14 | 358.26 |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
0.24), kinesthetic (F = 13.96, p < 0.01, effect size = 0.20), and multimodal learning (F = 23.99, p < 0.01, effect size = 0.27) styles, and English language achievement (F = 23.05, p < 0.01, effect size = 0.26) by school types.
Results of post hoc analysis, in
School Location (I) | School Location (J) | MD (I-J) | D | 95% Confidence Interval | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lower | Upper | ||||
Visual | |||||
Urban | Semi-urban | −0.60* | −0.38 | −0.95 | −0.26 |
Rural | −0.084 | −0.05 | −0.49 | 0.33 | |
Semi-urban | Rural | 0.52* | 0.33 | 0.02 | 1.02 |
Auditory | |||||
Urban | Semi-urban | −1.25* | −0.56 | −1.73 | −0.77 |
Rural | 0.33 | 0.15 | −0.24 | 0.90 | |
Semi-urban | Rural | 1.58* | 0.81 | 0.88 | 2.27 |
Read/Write | |||||
Urban | Semi-urban | −1.31* | −0.67 | −1.74 | −0.89 |
Rural | 0.38 | 0.20 | −0.12 | 0.87 | |
Semi-urban | Rural | 1.69* | 0.99 | 1.08 | 2.30 |
Kinesthetic | |||||
Urban | Semi-urban | −1.22* | −0.60 | −1.67 | −0.78 |
Rural | 0.40 | 0.20 | −0.13 | 0.92 | |
Semi-urban | Rural | 1.62* | 0.86 | 0.98 | 2.26 |
Multimodal | |||||
Urban | Semi-urban | 4.39* | 0.83 | 3.24 | 5.54 |
Rural | −1.03 | −0.19 | −2.39 | 0.32 | |
Semi-urban | Rural | −5.42* | −1.54 | −7.08 | −3.76 |
English Language Achievement | |||||
Urban | Semi-urban | 22.67* | 1.25 | 18.76 | 26.59 |
Rural | 13.90* | 0.81 | 9.30 | 18.50 | |
Semi-urban | Rural | −8.77* | 0.49 | −14.42 | −3.13 |
*p < 0.05.
RQ3: Is there any significant impact of demographic factors, learning styles, and personality traits on English language achievement?
School Type (I) | School Type (J) | MD (I-J) | D | 95% Confidence Interval | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lower | Upper | ||||
Auditory | |||||
Government | Non-government | −0.05 | −0.03 | −0.46 | 0.36 |
Semi-government | 0.79* | 0.37 | 0.37 | 1.22 | |
Non-government | Semi-government | 0.85* | 0.36 | 0.46 | 1.24 |
Read/Write | |||||
Government | Non-government | −0.04 | −0.03 | −0.40 | 0.32 |
Semi-government | 0.94* | 0.50 | 0.57 | 1.31 | |
Non-government | Semi-government | 0.98* | 0.52 | 0.64 | 1.33 |
Kinesthetic | |||||
Government | Non-government | −0.21 | −0.10 | −0.59 | 0.17 |
Semi-government | 0.74* | 0.37 | 0.34 | 1.13 | |
Non-government | Semi-government | 0.94* | 0.47 | 0.58 | 1.30 |
Multimodal | |||||
Government | Non-government | 0.41 | 0.08 | −0.58 | 1.39 |
Semi-government | −2.72* | −0.52 | −3.74 | −1.70 | |
Non-government | Semi-government | −3.13* | −0.60 | −4.07 | −2.19 |
English Language Achievement | |||||
Government | Non-government | 11.06* | 0.53 | 7.51 | 14.60 |
Semi-government | 1.91 | 0.11 | −1.76 | 5.58 | |
Non-government | Semi-government | −9.15* | −0.48 | −12.53 | −5.77 |
*p < 0.05.
Model | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | 95.0% Confidence Interval for B | Correlations | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B | Std. Error | Beta | Lower | Upper | Zero-order | Partial | Part | |
Step 1: Model 1 | ||||||||
Constant | 60.65 | 1.67 | 57.36 | 63.91 | ||||
Gender | −0.32 | 1.50 | −0.01 | −3.26 | 2.62 | −0.09 | −0.01 | −0.01 |
U vs R | −17.05 | 2.56 | −0.26** | −22.08 | −12.01 | −0.16 | −0.25 | −0.23 |
U vs SU | −19.13 | 2.25 | −0.34** | −23.54 | −14.72 | −0.37 | −0.31 | −0.29 |
G vs SG | 3.05 | 1.86 | 0.07 | −0.60 | 6.71 | 0.11 | 0.06 | 0.057 |
G vs NG | −4.94 | 1.86 | −0.12** | −8.59 | −1.29 | −0.25 | −0.10 | −0.09 |
Step 2: Model 2 | ||||||||
Constant | 53.80 | 1.72 | 50.416 | 57.17 | ||||
Gender | 2.49 | 1.44 | 0.06 | −0.33 | 5.31 | −0.09 | 0.067 | 0.056 |
U vs R | −17.27 | 2.41 | −0.26** | −21.99 | −12.55 | −0.16 | −0.27 | −0.23 |
U vs SU | −15.11 | 2.15 | −0.27** | −19.34 | −10.89 | −0.37 | −0.26 | −0.23 |
G vs SG | −0.17 | 1.78 | −0.00 | −3.66 | 3.317 | 0.109 | −0.004 | −0.00 |
G vs NG | −5.21 | 1.74 | −0.13** | −8.64 | −1.79 | −0.25 | −0.12 | −0.10 |
Mm | 1.22 | 0.13 | 0.34** | 0.97 | 1.465 | 0.398 | 0.347 | 0.310 |
Step 3: Model 3 | ||||||||
Constant | 45.69 | 3.99 | 37.86 | 53.53 | ||||
Gender | 1.92 | 1.45 | 0.05 | −0.93 | 4.78 | −0.09 | 0.05 | 0.04 |
U vs R | −16.72 | 2.41 | −0.25** | −21.45 | −11.98 | −0.16 | −0.26 | −0.22 |
U vs SU | −14.79 | 2.15 | −0.26** | −19.01 | −10.57 | −0.37 | −0.26 | −0.22 |
G vs SG | −0.34 | 1.77 | −0.01 | −3.82 | 3.14 | 0.11 | −0.01 | −0.01 |
G vs NG | −5.15 | 1.74 | −0.13** | −8.57 | −1.74 | −0.25 | −0.11 | −0.10 |
Mm | 1.20 | 0.13 | 0.33** | 0.95 | 1.45 | 0.40 | 0.34 | 0.30 |
Exv | 2.46 | 1.10 | 0.07* | 0.31 | 4.61 | 0.14 | 0.09 | 0.07 |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01; U = Urban, R = Rural, SU = Semi-urban, G = Government, SG = Semi-government, NG = Non-government, Mm = Multimodal, Exv = Extraversion; Model 1: R2 = 0.206, Adjusted R2 = 0.200, F = 34.679, p < 0.01, effect size = 0.26; predictors—Gender, Urban vs Rural, Urban vs Semi-urban, Government vs Semi-government, Government vs non-government; Model 2: R2 = 0.301, Adjusted R2 = 0.295, F = 91.743, p < 0.01, effect size = 0.43; predictors—Gender, Government vs Non-government, Urban vs Rural, Urban vs Semi-urban, Government vs Semi-government, Multimodal; Model 3: R2 = 0.307, Adjusted R2 = 0.299, F = 5.062, p < 0.01, effect size = 0.44; predictors—Gender, Government vs Non-government, Urban vs Rural, Urban vs Semi-urban, Government vs Semi-government., Multimodal, Extraversion; Dependent variable: English Language Achievement.
This cross sectional quantitative study was designed and accomplished to know the prevalence of the personality traits and learning styles among Bangladeshi EFL learners from secondary level of education. In addition, in view of academic achievement in EFL learning, relationship between students’ gender with their personality traits and learning styles also been explored. The present study investigated the prevalence of personality traits for secondary level students and among the 676 respondents.
Exploratory research, such as personality is useful in examining the psychological difference between sex and the differences are often described in terms of gender having greater ratings on that characteristic, on average [
Results indicate that among the respondents the highest portion (51.48%) preferred to learn applying Multimodal learning styles and the lower portion 2.81% preferred to learn through Visual learning style. Besides, the rest of the respondents preferred to learn through Auditory, Read/Write and Kinesthetic, the rates were 19.82%, 8.28% and 17.60% respectively. Again, the highest mean for male EFL learner was observed for the learning styles Multimodal whereas for the female it was Auditory. Barbe & Milone [
The findings show that multimodal has the highest mean value in rural areas than that of other areas, and it is lowest in semi-urban areas. Again, among all other learning styles the mean value of multimodal has higher value of semi-government school than that of other two type school. On the other hand, the mean value of visual learning is lowest in semi-government school among all other learning styles. The present study found that there exists variation between and within groups of learning style both in different school location and different school type as all the learning types are significance for *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 except visual learning style for different school type.
Learning style relates to an individual preferential manner of absorbing, understanding, and retaining data. This research also disclosed the meaning of the EFL learners’ positive correlation between learning styles and academic results. The results of the study show that Multimodal has a statistically significant connection with academic achievement or grades of students. When learners preferred to obtain data in a multitude of modes, different learning techniques and strategies should be used to meet students’ requirements. If a student has multiple (multimodal) learning styles, the benefits acquired through various learning methods include the capacity to learn faster and deeper in order to make recall more successful at a later date [
Pornsakulvanich et al. [
Helping their learners attain academic achievement has always been a significant issue of educators, teachers and administrators. The linguistic educators should study personality and learning style to provide an elated teaching-learning atmosphere by creating well-disposed teaching-learning approaches. In particular, extensive studies are available to show the connection between personality traits, learning styles, and academic performance. The language educators have countless explanations for understanding the logic of studying the learning styles as individuals have their own learning style. It is thought that each student acquires data in various respects and that no style of learning is superior to others. It is essential for each student to take complete advantage of their own learning style. If accommodated, our learning style can lead to enhanced teaching attitudes and increased productivity, academic achievement, and creativity. In addition, teachers should develop their own teaching styles and tactics to satisfy the distinct needs of the learners. EFL teachers and the school authority should make the parents aware about their children’s learning style and personality trait so that they can provide more fruitful language learning environment at home for the learners.
Only mainstream secondary schools were chosen for this study. For time and budget constrain other junior secondary level institution such as Madrasah, English medium and vocational institutions were not taken under the preview of this study, which is a limitation of this research. Future research can confront with the different samples from other types of institutions, and then it could be possible to do a comparative analysis. Ample amount of training should be provided to the teachers, so that they can easily define the personality traits and learning styles of their students. It will help them to design an effective teaching-learning strategies for their students. The VARK questionnaire was not statistically validated. Educational researchers tried to discover a way to validate VARK. Unfortunately, they could not discover a satisfying statistical method, validating the VARK-based four-factor model [
Further study can be done with larger samples and from general, technical and madrasah educational streams and more in-depth data can be collected for better understanding the situation. Moreover, a study can be done in exploring the importance of incorporating personality traits and learning style issues in the education of teachers in Bangladesh. Further study can be done in exploring the learning styles and personality traits of the teachers as it is observed in previous studies that these are significantly related to the academic excellence.
It has been shown through countless research that both low- and high-skill learners receive greater ratings on standardized performance exams when taught in their learning styles domain. Whatever learning styles learners prefer, knowing their preferences in how they obtain data in their teaching may be useful to educators as well as helping learners perform efficiently in the classroom. Answers of the research questions are highly anticipated to offer educators some idea of improving the country’s situation in terms of EFL teaching and learning not only in the country context but in other non-native context as well. Teachers teaching strategies have a great impact on students learning as well. Teachers’ development program would be helpful for developing their capabilities to distinguish the individual differences so that they can design an effective motivational as well as teaching strategies. Moreover, teachers understanding about the learning styles of the learners would open the door to the possibilities for ameliorate the students’ learning potential and their attitudes toward learning. In traditional EFL classrooms of the country, teacher, mostly uses the lecture method in some cases they allow students to do some reading /writing tasks. The findings of this study give an insight that it is time to revise the teaching strategies of the teachers. Teachers have to be more conscious about students’ personality development issues as the majority of the students belong to agreeableness whereas extroverts are performing better when it considered the academic achievement.
The author declares no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
Faisal, R.A. (2019) Influence of Personality and Learning Styles in English Language Achievement. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 7, 304-324. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2019.78022