AX

TEACHING AND THE TEACHER'S PERSONALITY

WILLIAM J.F. LEW

This paper is intended to explore the relationship between teaching and the teacher's per-
sonality. The exploration is primarily based on relevant research and theory. Recent research
on teacher personality in the United States, the United Kingdom and Hong Kong will be reported,
following a brief discussion of the nature of teaching, the task of the teacher, and the importance
of teacher personality.

Teaching and the Teacher's Task

Gage (1964) points out that 'teaching' is a misleadingly generic term; it embraces far too
many kinds of process, of behavior, of activity, to be the proper subject of a single theory.
He suggests that the concept of teaching be analyzed according to the types of (1) teacher
activities, (2) educational objectives, and/or (3) learning theories.
If the purpose of the instructional activities (lecture, discussion, etc.) is to modify student
behavior in terms of stated instructional objectives (cognitive, psychomotor, and affective), then
the activity is defined as instruction (Hough and Duncan, 1970). The terms 'teaching' and
'instruction' are often interchangeably used.
A teacher is a person engaged in interactive behavior with one or more students for the
purpose of effecting a change in those students. The change, whether it is to be in knowledge
(cognitive), skill (psychomotor) or feeling states (affective), is intentional on the part of the teacher
(McNeil and Popham, 1973). This designation distinguishes the teacher from instructional
materials and other school personnel.
The essential task of the teacher is to arrange the conditions of the learner's environment
so that the processes of learning will be activated, supported, enhanced, and maintained (Gagne,
1976). Teacher personality is a crucial factor in arranging the conditions of the learner's en-
vironment for effective teaching.

The Importance of Teacher Personality

Personality may be viewed as the dynamic organization of those traits and characteristic
patterns of behavior that are unique to the individual (Callahan, 1966). Some social psycholo-
ists take the position that personality is purely a matter of social perception - that it is meaning-
less to speak of anyone's personality apart from the particular people who interact with him, get
impressions about him, and use trait terms in describing him (Holt, 1971). A trait is a simple
behavioral pattern - a disposition or tendency to behave in a describable way. According to
Allport (1966), a trait (1) is more generalized than a habit, (2) is dynamic and determinative in

1977 EDUCATION JOURNAL No.VI

10
f *ffl t f

behavior, (3) may be viewed either in the light of the personality which contains it, or in the light
of its distribution in the population at large, and (4) cannot be proved nonexistent by the sheer
fact that some acts are inconsistent with it.
Research on teacher personality is based on the assumption that the teacher as a person is a
significant variable in the teaching-learning process. Personality influences the behavior of the
teacher in diverse ways, such as interaction with students, methods selected, and learning
experiences chosen(Murray, 1972).
The effective use of a teacher's personality is essential in conducting instructional activities.
Personality aids teaching, for communication takes place between the teacher and the learner—
even in the absence of the spoken word (nonverbal communication). The teacher whose per-
sonality helps create and maintain a classroom or learning environment in which students feel
comfortable and in which they are motivated to learn is said to have a desirable teaching
personality (Callahan, 1966).
Each individual has characteristic attributes of personality which influence both the manner
in which he behaves toward others and the ways in which they respond to him. The teacher
with pervasive authoritarian characteristics, for example, is likely to reflect them in his relation-
ships with students and in the techniques he uses in his instruction (Morrison and Mclntyre,
1972.)
The school is more than a place where knowledge and skills are taught and learned: it is
a miniature community in itself where members interact and influence the behavior of each other
(Shoben, 1962). The nature of interactions and influences in the school is an important factor
in determining the learner's perceptions of school and his attitudes toward school-related persons
and activities (Finley, 1969). This factor involves the interplay between the personality of the
teacher and that of the learner.
According to Khan and Weiss (1973), it can be postulated from the theory of interpersonal
perception that a learner's attitudes toward the teacher will affect his attitudes toward the courses
taught by the teacher and toward the school.
It may be further postulated that the learner's attitude toward a teacher is a function of
the teacher's personality.
Nelson (1964) reported that teachers and pupils in junior high school deviate significantly
in terms of their attitudes toward each other. He found that teachers are cognitively oriented
toward pupils while pupils are affectively oriented toward teachers.
Teacher personality is, therefore, directly and indirectly related to learning and teaching in
the affective domain as well as to that in cognitive and psychomotor domains.
Reports of great teachers commonly stress their personalities, rather than their scholarship
or technical teaching skills. If we are to be concerned with the student's development of identity,
Hilgard (1965) suggests that we should not be afraid of showing feeling. Objectivity can be
served by showing that there are those who believe otherwise, but we need not do obeisance to
other viewpoints by sterilizing our own enthusiasm into a vapid eclecticism.
Erikson (1964) distinguishes between the identifications that help shape a growing per-

No.VI EDUCATION JOURNAL 1977

 u

sonality, and the identity that is later achieved. That is, the child identifies himself with
significant people, such as parents and teachers, and incorporates attitudes, ideals, and personality
traits from them.

Recent Research on Teacher Personality

Despite Getzels and Jackson's (1963) discouraging conclusion about previous research on
the relation between teacher personality and teaching effectiveness, research efforts have con-
tinued. Reported below are some recent researches on teacher personality, including efforts
to find a personality base for differences in classroom performance or teacher effectiveness.
1. Many of the positive characteristics of successful teachers discovered by previous re-
search efforts seem to be in line with Maslow's conceptualization of the self-actualizing person,
whom he sees as a fully functioning, psychologically healthy individual possessing such attributes
as acceptance, spontaneity, autonomy, democratic nature, and creativeness. Maslow (1970)
suggests that the self-actualizing person is indeed the most effective teacher. This hypothesis
was supported by the findings of empirical studies conducted by Murray (1972) and Dandes
(1966).
2. Coats (1970) did a factor analysis of 42,810 student responses as student perceptions of
teachers. It was found that a factor labeled teacher 'charisma' accounted for 61.5% of the vari-
ance in test items. It was concluded that teacher charisma is probably a significant factor of
teacher effectiveness.
3. Beck (1967) investigated 2,108 sixth-grade pupils' perception of teacher merit. He con-
cluded that the pupils perceived the effective teacher as a warm, friendly and supportive person
who communicates clearly, motivates and disciplines pupils effectively, and is flexible in me-
thodology.
4. Ekstrom's study (1976) explored the relations between certain cognitive and attitudinal
characteristics and the instructional behavior of American elementary school teachers. All sub-
jects (41 second-grade teachers and 54 fifth-grade teachers) took a battery of tests measuring
aptitude, knowledge, cognitive style, and attitude. One of her findings indicated that more flexible
teachers are better able to respond differentially to pupils without having to resort to using
various organizational strategies (aides, groups, etc.) to produce individualization.
5. Designed to investigate selected aspects of teacher personality in differing American
high school environments, Walker's study (1969) suggested that teachers in high creative schools
are more adaptive, flexible, outgoing, permissive, and nurturant - factors considered important
in fostering creativity.
6. Investigating longitudinally nearly 2,400 first-and fourth-year British secondary school
pupils' attitudes toward school and teachers, Thompson (1975) confirmed the findings of Wright's
study (1962) that what pupils find lacking in teachers are those qualities which make them human.
She found that teachers tend to be seen as less happy, kind, fair and warm than other adults
while excelling in wisdom, success and hardness. Those attributes seem to coincide with those

1977 EDUCATION JOURNAL No.VI

12
f TVt f t

of the teachers in traditional society. It was also found that attitudes toward both school
and teachers change as pupils progress through the system. Older pupils do not rate teachers as
less human as they did when they were younger, but do rate them as less wise and successful.
7. In an analysis of data on 127 primary teachers and 95 secondary teachers in English
schools, Cortis (1973) discerned that, by comparison with primary teachers, the secondary
teachers tend to be more sensitive yet more tolerant in personality terms, to hold more progressive
educational attitudes and to express a higher degree of satisfaction with teaching. Cortis' find-
ings are contrary to those of Ryans (1960) who, in his extensive survey of characteristics of
American elementary and secondary teachers, noted that secondary school teachers are more
traditional in their educational viewpoints while elementary school teachers are more permissive.
8. In a comprehensive project by McKeachie, Lin, and Mann (1971), all items that had
previously been used for student ratings of instructors and instruction in American colleges and
universities were factor analyzed in a series of studies. Six stable factors that emerged were
skill, overload (difficulty), structure, feedback, group interaction and student-teacher rapport
(warmth). One of the findings was that the students of teachers who were high in 'rapport'
(warmth) performed better on measures of critical thinking than did the other students.
9. A number of characteristics, some of which are related to teacher personality, have
been consistently identified as comprising effective teaching at the college and university level
by Eble (1970) and Hildebrand and Wilson (1970). The major factors were found to be:
A. Clarity of organization, interpretation and explanation;
B. Encouragement of class discussion and the presentation of diverse points of view;
C. Stimulation of students' interests, motivation and thinking;
D. Manifestation of attentiveness to and interest in students;
E. Manifestation of enthusiasm.
10. Haslett (1976) employed semantic differential scales to measure 667 American high
school students' and 219 American college students' concept of a good teacher. She also com-
pared her findings with those of previous studies on college instructors (Clinton, 1930; Bous-
field, 1940; and Perry, 1971).
Table 1 shows characteristics (including those related to personality) of good teachers in rank
order of their importance in each study.

No.VI EDUCATION JOURNAL 1977

 n ¥
-±±* rSi.
13

Table 1
Characteristics of Good Teachers in Order of Their Importance in Each of Four Studies

Clinton (1930) Bousfield (1940) Perry (1971) Haslett (1976)

High School Ss College Ss

Knowledge of Fairness Well prepared Clarity Knowledge of

subject for class subject
Pleasing person- Mastery of Sincere interest Trustworthi- Interesting
ality subject in subject ness
Neatness in work Interesting style Knowledge of Challenging Clarity of
and appearance of presentation subject presentation
Fairness Well organized Effective teach- Fairness Fairness
ing methods
Kind, sympathetic Clarity of Tests for Strictness Competency
presentation understanding
Sense of humor Interest in Fairness Presents Trustworthiness
students others' views
Interest in Helpfulness Effective commu- Experienced Open-mindedness
profession nication
Interesting style Ability to direct Encourages in- Admits mistakes
of presentation discussion dependent thought Organized
Alertness and Sincerity Logical organi- Concern for Responsiveness
broad-mindedness zation of course students
Knowledge of Keen intellect Motivates stud- Interesting Available to
methods ents students

Teacher Personality as Perceived by Hong Kong Secondary School Students

The present author, with the assistance of his students at the School of Education of the
Chinese University, conducted a survey study of student perception of teacher personality in
Hong Kong during the academic year 1976-77. The subjects were 628 Chinese students (326
boys and 302 girls) randomly selected from Forms III, IV, V, and VI in S3 Hong Kong secondary
schools (including those in Kowloon and the New Territories). They were asked to select those
of the 100 items in a personality inventory developed by the investigator that indicate the per-
sonality traits of most (over 50 %) of their teachers and also of their ideal teacher as they perceive
them. The findings are shown in Tables 2 and 3.
The common traits in Table 2 are those personality traits of most teachers as perceived by
more than 45% of their students, while the ideal traits in Table 3 are those personality traits
of the ideal teacher as conceived by more than 70% of the students. The cut-off point (70%)

1977 EDUCATION JOURNAL No.VI

14
l£ A S K: IT $ S -^ A -t -t

in Table 3 is higher than that (45%) in Table 2. This suggests greater agreement among Hong
Kong secondary school students in their conception of an ideal teacher's personality traits than
their perception of most teachers' common traits.

Table 2
Common Personality Traits of Most Hong Kong Secondary School Teachers as Perceived by
Their Students

Common Traits Response (%) *

Practical, realistic 64.02
Friendly 62.09
Responsible 57.60
Biased, partial 55.83
Placid 53.83
Rational 53.05
Concerned about morality 52.27
Planful 51.27
Cultured 49.73
Frugal 49.19
Dry, dull 48.36
Natural, unaffected 48.34
Sober, solemn 48.31
Warm, outgoing 48.01
Good-tempered 47.04
Conventional 45.75
Dominant 45.58

* Cut-off point 45 %

Table 3
Personality Traits of the Ideal Teacher as Conceived by Hong Kong Secondary School Students

Ideal Traits Response(%) *

Good-tempered 87.61
Warm, outgoing 86.85
Having a sense of humor 86.04
Capable of being a leader 84.60

No.VI EDUCATION JOURNAL 1977

 t /N
15

Responsible 83.83
Efficient, businesslike 83.04
Patient 82.65
Liberal, progressive 82.12
Considerate, concerned 82.03
Calm 81.76
Democratic 81.73
Cheerful 81.65
Sincere 81.64
Open-minded 81.53
Friendly 81.24
Planful 80.43
Flexible 79.74
Ambiverted 77.20
Tolerant 77.16
Foresighted 76.96
Precise 76.64
Rational 76.50
Analytical 76.37
Natural, unaffected 75.77
Kindly, tender 75.63
Emotionallyti stable 74.71
Shrewd 73.93
Energetic 73.67
Impartial 73.41
T-"> "> O
Cautious /J.JO

Sympathetic 73.33
Having common wide interests 72.86
Diligent 72.76
Reflective, deliberate 72.75
Participating 72.29
Creative 71.96
Cooperative 71.76
Optimistic 71.66
Frank 70.77
Facile in speech 70.26
Generous 70.24
Ready to try new things 70.18

* Cut-off point 70%

1977 EDUCATION JOURNAL No.VI

16
f /Vi t t

The qualities cited in Tables 2 and 3 do not describe any particular teacher, of course,
but a good teacher in any Hong Kong secondary school should possess at least some of the per-
sonality traits listed in Table 3. Seven traits (friendly, responsible, rational, planful, unaffected,
warm, and good-tempered) in Table 2 are also found in Table 3, which indicates that most Hong
Kong secondary school teachers already possess these seven personality traits of an ideal teacher.

Concluding Remarks
In an investigation of student description of their ideal teacher, Gage (1963) concluded that
if teachers learned how the students wanted them to behave they would become more like the
student ideal. If this conclusion is valid, the results of the present author's study in Hong Kong
and other similar studies elsewhere should be useful for teachers' consideration. It is hoped
that the research findings and theories presented in this paper will help improve teacher character-
istics, especially teacher personality, with a view to promoting teaching effectiveness and up-
grading the quality of teaching.

No.VI EDUCATION JOURNAL 1977

 1 IT
7
j/

REFERENCES

1. Allport, G.W. Traits Revisited. American Psychologist, 1966, 21, 1-10, In G.

Lindzey et al (Eds.), Theories of Personality: Primary Sources and Research,
2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1973.
2. Beck, W.R. Pupils' Perceptions of Teacher Merit: A Factor Analysis of Five Postulated
Dimensions. Journal of Educational Research, 1967, 61, 127-128.
3. Callahan, S.G. Successful Teaching in Secondary Schools. Glenview, 111.: Scott,
1966.
4. Coats, W.D. Student Perceptions of Teacher: A Factor Analytic Study. Paper presented
the American Educational Research Association convention, 1970. Cited in W. Jones
& P. A. Sommers, The Delicate Art of Teacher Evaluation. Journal of Experimental
Education, 1976, 44, 44-50.
5. Cortis, G.A. An Analysis of Some Differences between Primary and Secondary Teachers.
Educational Research, 1973, 15, 109-114.
6. Dandes, H.M. Psychological Health and Teaching Effectiveness. Journal of Teacher
Education, 1966, 18, 301-306.
7. Eble, K.E. The Recognition and Evaluation of Teaching. Salt Lake City, Utah: The
Project to Improve College Teaching, 1970. ED 046 350. Cited in J.W. Trent &
A.M. Cohen, Research on Teaching in Higher Education. In R.M.W. Travers (Ed.),
Second Handbook of Research on Teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1973.
8. Ekstrom, R.B. Teacher Aptitudes, Knowledge, Attitudes, and Cognitive Styles as Pre-
dictors of Teaching Behavior. Journal of Teacher Education, 1976, 27,329-331.
9. Erikson, E.H. Insight and Responsibility. New York: Norton, 1964.
10. Finley, R.E. Environmental and Experiential Characteristics of Students and Attitudes
toward School. Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, 1969. Cited in S.B. Khan
& J. Weiss, The Teaching of Affective Responses. In R.M.W. Travers (Ed.), Second
Handbook of Research on Teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1973.
11. Gage, N.L. A Method for 'Improving' Teacher Behavior, Journal of Teacher Educa-
tion 1963, 14, 261-266.
12. Gage, N.L. Theories of Teaching. In E. Hilgard (Ed.), Theories of Learning and
Instruction (Sixty-Third Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education,
Part I). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964.
13. Gagne, R.M. The Learning Basis of Teaching Methods. In N.L. Gage (Ed.), The
Psychology of Teaching Methods (Seventy-Fifth Yearbook of the National Society
for the Study of Education, Part I). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976.
14. Getzels, J.W. & Jackson, P.W. The Teacher's Personality and Characteristics. In N.L.
Gage (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963.
15. Haslett, B.J. Dimensions of Teaching Effectiveness: A Student Perspective. Journal

1977 EDUCATION JOURNAL No.VI

18
^ /N 1$ $t F3 ^r m yL 4l ~t -T"

of Experimental Education, 1976, 44, 4-10.

16. Hildebrand, M. & Wilson, R.C. Effective University Teaching and Its Evaluation.
Berkeley: University of California, Center for Research and Development in Higher
Education, 1970. ED 039 860.
17. Hilgard, E.R. The Human Dimension in Teaching. College and University Bulletin,
1965, 17, 1-3 & 5-6. In K. Yamamoto (Ed.), Teaching. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1969.
18. Holt, R.R. Assessing Personality. New York: Harcourt, 1971.
19. Hough, J.B. & Duncan, J.K. Teaching: Description and Analysis. Reading, Mass.:
Addison-Wesley, 1970.
20. Khan, S.B. & Weiss, J. The Teaching of Affective Responses. In R.M.W. Travers
(Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1973.
21. Maslow, A.H. Motivation and Personality, 2nd ed. New York: Harper & Row, 1970.
22. McKeachie, W.J., Lin, Y. & Mann, W. Student Ratings of Teacher Effectiveness: Validity
Studies. American Educational Research Journal, 1971, 8, 435-445.
23. McNeil, J.D. & Popham, WJ. The Assessment of Teacher Competence. In R.M.W.
Travers (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Teaching. Chicago: Rand
McNally, 1973.
24. Morrison, A. & Mclntyre, D. Teachers and Teaching. Harmondsworth, Middlesex:
Penguin, 1972.
25. Murray, E. Students' Perceptions of Self-Actualizing and Non-Self-Actualizing Teachers.
Journal of Teacher Education, 1972, 23, 383-387.
26. Nelson, C.C. Affective and Cognitive Attitudes of Junior High School Teachers and Pupils
Journal of Educational Research, 1964, 58, 81-83.
27. Ryans, D. Characteristics of Teachers. Washington, D.C. : American Council on
Education, 1960.
28. Shoben, E.J., Jr. Potency in the Schools. Teachers College Record, 1962, 63, 548-550.
29. Thompson, B.L. Secondary School Pupils' Attitudes to School and Teachers. Educational
Research, 1975, 18, 62-66.
30. Walker, W.J. Teacher Personality in Creative School Environments, Journal of Edu-
cation Research, 1969, 62, 243-246.
31. Wright, D. S. A Comparative Study of the Adolescent's Concepts of His Parents and
Teachers. Educational Review, 1962, 14, 3.

No.VI EDUCATION JOURNAL 1977

 19

and the Teacher's Personality—^; )

1977 EDUCATION JOURNAL No.VI

 '
20 /\

> ^m
/EE' Gfe /^- E3- 4-nfe Alii
' ISJMIffijaiSrp'J '

No.VI EDUCATION JOURNAL 1977