Learning Style and Cognitive Functions

Home Forums General Psychology Learning Style and Cognitive Functions

Which learning style do you think is your strongest preference?

You must be logged in to participate.
  • #1 Activist
  • #2 Theorist
  • #3 Pragmatist
  • #4 Reflector
  • LadyNerdsky
    Participant
    • Type: FiNe
    • Development: ll-l
    • F Attitude: Unseelie

    I’ve been reviewing learning styles recently before I start supervising a new clinical intern. In reading the four key learning styles developed by Honey and Mumford (based on the Experiential Learning Theory of Kolb, 1984), I noticed they might overlap nicely with Jung’s four Judging Functions: Activist (Fe), Theorist (Ti), Pragmatist (Te), Reflector (Fi)

    So I’m curious, reading the four learning styles below, which one do you most relate to, and is that congruent with the first judging function in your cognitive stack? (I personally am about 70% reflector and 30% theorist). The theory states we’re a blend of 2-3 styles, but often have a strong preference for one style over the others.

    Activist

    Activists involve themselves fully and without bias in new experiences. They enjoy the here and now, and are happy to be dominated by immediate experiences. They are open-minded, not sceptical, and this tends to make them enthusiastic about anything new. Their philosophy is: “I’ll try anything once”. They tend to act first and consider the consequences afterwards. Their days are filled with activity. They tackle problems by brainstorming. As soon as the excitement from one activity has died down they are busy looking for the next. They tend to thrive on the challenge of new experiences but are bored with implementation and longer term consolidation. They are gregarious people constantly involving themselves with others but, in doing so, they seek to centre all activities around themselves.

    Theorist

    Theorists adapt and integrate observations into complex but logically sound theories. They think problems through in a vertical, step-by-step logical way. They assimilate disparate facts into coherent theories. They tend to be perfectionists who won’t rest easy until things are tidy and fit into a rational scheme. They like to analyse and synthesize. They are keen on basic assumptions, principles, theories models and systems thinking. Their philosophy prizes rationality and logic. “If its logical its good.” Questions they frequently ask are: “Does it make sense?” “How does this fit with that?” “What are the basic assumptions?” They tend to be detached, analytical and dedicated to rational objectivity rather than anything subjective or ambiguous. Their approach to problems is consistently logical. This is their ‘mental set’ and they rigidly reject anything that doesn’t fit with it. They prefer to maximise certainty and feel uncomfortable with subjective judgements, lateral thinking and anything flippant.

    Pragmatist

    Pragmatists are keen on trying out ideas, theories and techniques to see if they work in practice. They positively search out new ideas and take the first opportunity to experiment with applications. They are the sort of people who return from courses brimming with new ideas that they want to try out in practice. They like to get on with things and act quickly and confidently on ideas that attract them. They tend to be impatient with ruminating and open-ended discussions. They are essentially practical, down to earth people who like making practical decisions and solving problems. They respond to problems and opportunities ‘as a challenge’. Their philosophy is “There is always a better way” and “If it works it’s good”.

    Reflector

    Reflectors like to stand back to ponder experiences and observe them from many different perspectives. They collect data, both first hand and from others, and prefer to think about it thoroughly before coming to a conclusion. The thorough collection and analysis of data about experiences and events is what counts so they tend to postpone reaching definitive conclusions for as long as possible. Their philosophy is to be cautious. They are thoughtful people who like to consider all possible angles and implications before making a move. They prefer to take a back seat in meetings and discussions. They enjoy observing other people in action. They listen to others and get the drift of the discussion before making their own points. They tend to adopt a low profile and have a slightly distant, tolerant unruffled air about them. When they act it is part of a wide picture which includes the past as well as the present and others’ observations as well as their own.

    Alice
    Participant
    • Type: FiSe
    • Development: ll--
    • F Attitude: Unseelie

    In most situations I’m absolutely a reflector, but if I’m especially comfortable or on top of my shit, sometimes I can throw caution to the wind and display the activity level of an activist!

    Elisa Day
    Participant
    • Type: FiSe
    • Development: ll--
    • F Attitude: Seelie

    I relate most to the theorist. That one sounds like general Ji to me.

    The activist sounds more Pe to me than Fe. Interesting.

    a.k.a.Janie
    Participant
    • Type: FiSe
    • Development: ll--
    • F Attitude: Unseelie

    I think I am, in descending order:
    1. Reflector – mostly in general
    2. Pragmatist – probably because I use mostly Te in my job. And this description fits my boss to a “T”, but he is most definitely high Fe. Maybe this one can be Je with a strong supporting Ji function?
    3. Theorist – Only in very specific situations where I’ve actually built such mental structures. It’s rare, though.
    4. Activist – sounds super Pe to me, too. Maybe I’m this way in fun activities occasionally, but not for learning or work.

    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • F Attitude: Unseelie

    Pragmatist. I’m not, per se, impatient with open-ended discussions – and my pragmatic goals are about mastering skills and organizing resources to express something inside, which arguably is not pragmatic at all. =D But the way I go about enacting my visions is very pragmatic. Even the way I evaluate my political stances is pragmatic. I think about how useful it is for certain ways of life to be promoted rather than merely toiling over ideology.  Basically, ideology is fun for theoretical debate, but useless if the application is weak and the reality of enacting policy on its behalf does not match its stated ideals. I also find it pointless to find reasons to ‘be offended’ in the name of promoting tolerance.  If you’re so damn tolerant, why not try to understand what the other person meant by it, in good faith, instead of getting all huffy and making it about you?  See, I really have minimal patience for misfiring ideals.

    • This reply was modified 2 weeks ago by Animal.
    • This reply was modified 2 weeks ago by Animal.
    • This reply was modified 2 weeks ago by Animal.
    Alerith
    Participant
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: ll-l
    • F Attitude: Adaptive

    hmm so I relate to parts of all of these, but most prominently Theorist and Pragmatist. From the descriptions I think those most resemble Ji and Je in general.. the other two styles sound a lot like Pe and Pi. So:

    Activist = Pe

    Theorist = Ji, particularly Ti or Fi with conscious Te

    Pragmatist = Je

    Reflector = Pi, combined with Ji

    I’m definitely a “try anything once” kinda person, and am constantly reaching outside my comfort zone in order to grow. Other than that though, I prolly relate to Activist least. I think I’m like 50% Theorist, 30% Pragmatist and 20% Reflector. I’ve realized lately that practicality and social impact (Fe) factor hugely into my thinking tho. I start with forming a concept of the reality of a problem, but that almost always flows into forming possible solutions and ways to present them to others so they’ll be influenced to implement them. I can literally be quoted as saying “There is always a better way” XD

    Ninth
    Participant
    • Type: TiSe
    • Development: l---
    • F Attitude: Directive

    Theorist > Reflector > Pragmatist

    I agree with Alerith

    Activist = Pe

    Theorist = Ji, particularly Ti or Fi with conscious Te

    Pragmatist = Je

    Reflector = Pi, combined with Ji

     

    *fades away*

    Connie
    Participant
    • Type: SiTe
    • Development: l-ll
    • F Attitude: Unseelie

    I am SiTe and relate to mostly to pragmatist.  I also have a bent toward the theorist , possibly because of being Si worldview type (?) or Ne (?).  I love exploring new theories and ideas and if one resonates I will jump into it, but I do ask “Does it make sense?” And “Is it logical?”  I will reflect before acting (mostly)🤔  Auburn says I am an NeFi within an Si lead so sometimes my Ne will become so fascinated with a new idea/theory that I will act before reflecting.  It was how I came to vultology ☺️ So sometimes it works out for the good.  If this sounds rambling I apologize but I am trying to put my thoughts down as they come into my head.

    Rondo
    Moderator
    • Type: NeTi
    • Development: llll
    • F Attitude: Adaptive

    @connieabrams – I didn’t think your response was at all rambly! I can relate to what you’re saying but from the opposite end (as we would expect based on vultology I think!) as I don’t tend to take any interest in theories these days unless their basis is primarily physical and directly demonstrable and then from there I can move to start extrapolating. Although of course I can still get a bit carried away by a wild notion or theory, but that’s mostly when fear or some other emotion has clouded my perception, and I’m much better at recognizing that I’m probably being ridiculous nowadays XD.

    • This reply was modified 1 day, 12 hours ago by Rondo.
    • This reply was modified 1 day, 12 hours ago by Rondo.
Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
© Copyright 2012-2020 | CognitiveType.com
This website's articles, its reading methodology and practices are the intellectual property of J.E. Sandoval.
Animaged GIFs, images and videos belong to their respective owners.