Biography:

One of their most recent publications is Chapter 3 - Personality Frameworks. Which was published in journal .

More information about Jeanine M. Williamson research including statistics on their citations can be found on their Copernicus Academic profile page.

Jeanine M. Williamson's Articles: (6)

Chapter 3 - Personality Frameworks

AbstractThis chapter explores relationships between personality, teaching, and learning and then describes the two academic psychology frameworks that have been used to determine the personality traits of engineers, scientists, and librarians, the 16PF (Conn & Rieke, 1994) and Lounsbury and Gibson’s Personal Style Inventory (2006).

Chapter 4 - Personality Traits and Learning Styles of Librarians, Scientists, and Engineers

AbstractThis chapter reports the 16PF (Conn & Rieke, 1994), Personal Style Inventory (Lounsbury & Gibson, 2006), and Kolb Learning Style (Kolb & Kolb, 2013) characteristics of librarians, scientists, and engineers, where available. To enable a comparison of the three groups, the results are reported by instrument.

Chapter 6 - Reasons for Not Matching Instruction to Individual Differences

AbstractEven though matching instructional features to personality characteristics and learning styles has intuitive appeal and some supporting research evidence, a well-balanced account of adapting instruction to individual differences needs to include evidence not supporting the matching approach, as well. It is necessary to consider that matching might not always be a good idea, for four reasons. First, many studies do not show an increase in student learning performance from matching instruction to learning styles. Second, at times it might be good to challenge students to become more well-rounded by using less preferred personality traits and learning styles. Third, a perceived mismatch between a librarian’s personality and learning style characteristics and students’ can encourage the librarian to improve his or her instruction. Fourth, at times it may be better to match instructional methods to subject content than individual student characteristics.

Chapter 7 - Results of Survey

AbstractTo investigate the attitudes of science and engineering librarians to personalization, I administered a survey during the Spring of 2016. Members of the STS (Science and Technology Section of the Association of College and Research Libraries) and ELDNET (Engineering Libraries Division of the American Society of Engineering Education) were invited via messages in listservs to participate, and 37 chose to do so. The survey asked librarians for their perceptions of scientists’, engineers’, and their own personality traits and learning styles. The librarians were also asked free text questions about tailoring of instruction or communication to personality traits and learning styles.

Chapter 8 - Applications

AbstractThis chapter presents practical applications for incorporating learning styles and personality characteristics into science and engineering instruction. It includes an example of “teaching around the learning cycle” to appeal to all four learning styles in Kolb’s model, as well as examples of participation activities likely to appeal to individuals with different personality characteristics. The chapter concludes with considerations for teaching library instruction/information literacy to science classes, undergraduate engineering classes, graduate engineering classes, engineering design classes, and online classes.

Chapter 10 - Personality and Competencies for Engineering Students and Information Literacy

AbstractNelson and Fosmire (2010) mapped the ABET engineering accreditation Criterion 3 to the ACRL Standards for Science and Engineering/Technology Performance Indicators. In a similar vein, this section compares the personality traits that are congruous with the competencies in ABET Criterion 3 and the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. While it is not necessary for students to have particular personality traits to fulfill any of the competencies in these two documents, sections of the documents may be differentially appealing to students with different personality traits.

Advertisement
Join Copernicus Academic and get access to over 12 million papers authored by 7+ million academics.
Join for free!

Contact us