Running head: MYERS BRIGGS AND EDUCATION

The (In)Significance of the Myers Briggs

Type Indicator in Educational Contexts
Michael J. Edwards
Thongsook College

Author Note
To all my instructors and peers, past and present: a sincere thanks for your collaboration.
It has been a long, sometimes frustrating, yet interesting journey.

MYERS BRIGGS AND EDUCATION

2
Abstract

The Myers Briggs Type Indicator is used in various professional contexts in order to assess
suitability for employment, and styles of educational contexts. This study gives particular
attention to the latter. The literature review details the history of the MBTI, and its application to
education, including learning styles theory and its basis in methodology. Criticisms challenging
the quantitative structure, reliability and validity of the indicator are presented. The analysis
concludes by suggesting that, while further studies are needed to test whether MBTI may
contribute to positive dialogue, it should not be taken seriously as a pedagogical tool.

MYERS BRIGGS AND EDUCATION

The (In)Significance of the Myers Briggs

Type Indicator in Educational Contexts
The Meyers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a tool that fascinates teachers who feel the
need to understand diverse personality traits among their students. Considering its intended
purpose of indicating psychological preferences, the reason for teachers attraction to the MBTI
becomes clear. Much educational theory is rooted in accommodating personality types,
including that of the learning styles movement, and various differentiated instruction camps
(Kise, 2014). Moreover, the MBTI is often used to facilitate teambuilding within many
organizational contexts, including professional development in schools (Shreeve, 2000).
However, in recent years, its validity and reliability is challenged in professional research
(Pittenger, 2004). The respective researchers tend to use statistical analyses of factor,
distribution, correlation and regression in order to assess these properties, while those who use it
tend to take a more philosophical and idealistic approach to its utility in education. Therefore,
the use of MBTI seems to be decent for exploring the imagination, but efforts that extend its
application to more concrete endeavors in education could be futile.
Review of the Literature
History and Basis
As for its history, the MBTI is a product of a family team: Katherine Briggs and Isabel
Briggs Myers. Inspired by Jungian theory, they decided to develop a tool that may help people
overcome adversity toward one another, especially that which may have contributed to any of the
horridly destructive social tendencies observed during World War 2 (Brownfield, 1993). In turn,
Myers and Briggs devised a system of measuring preferences against four dichotomous sets of
categories related to personality type. These are Extravert/Introvert, Sensing/Intuitive,

MYERS BRIGGS AND EDUCATION

Thinking/Feeling and Judgment/Perception. An elaborate survey would be used to test each

item, indicating the most dominant aspects of that individuals personality type. Thus, the main
characteristics of ones personality are presumed to be more important than how they might vary
along a spectrum.1
Later after its development, Isabel could be seen visiting schools and requesting that they
allow her to conduct surveys of students and teachers with the MBTI. It began growing in
popularity, so much so that the Educational Testing Service agreed to be the publisher (Myers,
2011, p. 2). From here, many schools distributed the tool to raise awareness of the
characteristics listed in the indicator, while assessing affect related to students behavior. Thus,
teachers could configure some conception of learning styles by evaluating their individual types.
Education and Learning Styles
More specifically, teachers are thought to refer to the sixteen combinations indicated in
the MBTI to assess different degrees of style-preference in learning skills. For example, the
extraversion/introversion scale would assess how learners focus on content in an interactive or
ponderous fashion, while the sensing/intuitive scale would be telling of those who learn best
through hands-on activities or opportunities for meaning-making (Brownfield, 1993, p. 9).
Extraverts prefer talk-time and group work, and introverts have a tendency to think and work
alone...or so the story goes.
With similar information on record, a teacher may become meticulous in designing lesson
material, and even communicating with students. Feeling learners would respond well to
lighthearted suggestions for redirecting their attention to a task, especially when their groups are
enthusiastic. Thinking students, on the other hand, are said to need to know the objectives of a
course of work, as well as clear directions for the tasks involved. Judging students would

MYERS BRIGGS AND EDUCATION

prefer their teachers avoid giving overly-detailed instructions so as to begin working right away
(Brightman, 2015). In contrast, perceiving students tend to elicit a lot of information from
teachers about their assignments. Thus, given that these statements are true, the former might
learn with more precision when strategies are pre-taught, such as suggesting that learners color
code their work, or brainstorm and sequence ideas related to a specific question (para. 42).
Feeling students would best work with assignments divided into sub-components since they are
said to seek as much direction as possible before beginning a task (para. 45).
Criticism
Since the MBTI is a typology dividing preferential data into two categories, the outcome
of any large statistical analysis should show that each preference results in a bimodal
distribution. However, researchers have shown that it is not the case. In actuality, the data tend
to illustrate a normal distribution where most respondents standard scores are similarly situated
around the mean (Pittenger, 2004, p. 3). The indicators show that those dominant in any type are
much more similar to each other than previously thought. Therefore, the structure of the MBTI
is questionable.
In the same study, the reliability of the indicator is challenged since its types are divided
into dichotomies. When tested, all four preferences result in a large measure of standard error,
and those with scores that are close together in the distribution are often presented with entirely
different types (p. 4). The author subsequently reviews massive studies of factor analysis where
many participants differences could not be measured with the MBTI, and the percentages of
those with a certain score in a profession tended to be the same as in the population as a whole.
Therefore, the validity of MBTI is also challenged. The author concludes strongly by stating
(p. 5):

MYERS BRIGGS AND EDUCATION

There is no obvious evidence that there are 16 unique categories in which all people can
be placed. There is no evidence that scores generated by the MBTI reflect the stable and
unchanging personality traits that are claimed to be measured. Finally, there is no
evidence that the MBTI measures anything of value.

If this analysis is correct, then the entire foundation on which the indicator is based is thrown
into question. Furthermore, any move to alter teaching methods or make serious professional
decisions based on the MBTI would be counterintuitive. The only other consideration to
entertain is the idea that these types sometimes reflect important information about individuals
identity formation, and this could not be measured accurately through quantitative approaches.
However, there are other criticisms that challenge even these ideas
For instance, Peterson elaborates on reasons that keep intelligent individuals preoccupied
with personality tests such as the MBTI: Reaching further back, one may ask why people have
become so obsessed with the because I am worth it activities, rearranging and streamlining as
it were their own bodies to the stereotype (2006). To this extent one could wonder what
significant value there is left to this tool in either education or every-day relationships for that
matter.
Suggestions and Conclusion
There is surprisingly little research on student communication as it relates to the MBTI.
In an era when student-centeredness is highly suggested, it might be worth carrying out such a
study. After all, the MBTI is originally intended for understanding others, so student dialogue is
an appropriate addition to the mix. As for educational contexts, the quality of research that
challenges its structure, reliability and validity is quite strong, and therefore, any of the

MYERS BRIGGS AND EDUCATION

methodological suggestions attached to specific types should not be given serious consideration.
When over-individualization of curriculum development takes precedence over delivering the
best learning experience to as many students as possible, then a theoretical issue becomes a
practical problem.

MYERS BRIGGS AND EDUCATION

8
References

Brightman, H. J. (2015). GSU Master teacher program: On learning styles. Georgia State
University. Retrieved from www2.gsu.edu/~dschjb/wwwmbti.html.
Brownfield, K. N. (1993). The relationship between the Myers-Briggs personality types and
learning styles. Eastern New Mexico University. ERIC. Retrieved from
http://files.eric.gov/fulltext/ED381577.pdf.
Kise, J. (2014). Differentiation Through Personality Types: A Framework for Instruction,
Assessment, and Classroom Management. Skyhorse Publishing.
Myers, K. D. (2011). An extended history of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Instrument.
Retrieved from www.mbtitoday.org/downloads/An-Extended-History-of-the-MBTI.pdf.
Peterson, V. (2006). MBTI: Distorted reflections of personality. The Aarhus School of Business.
CREDO. Retrieved from http://www.hha.dk/man/cmsdocs/WP/2006/2006-05.pdf.
Pittenger, D. J. (2004). Measuring the MBTI and coming up short. Indiana University. Retrieved
from http://www.indiana.edu/~jobtalk/Articles/develop/mbti.pdf.
Shreeve, M. (2000). How the Myers Briggs temperament indicator can be used in teaching.
Pilgrims. Retrieved from www.hltmag.co.uk/nov06/mart04.rtf.

MYERS BRIGGS AND EDUCATION

9
Footnotes

A score of zero is thought to be a perfect mix of both characteristics, while a score of

one on either side indicates that degree of dominance, and suggests a respondents
personality type.