Comparing Personality and Learning Styles with Academic Performance

Turning our attention to testing the proposed hypotheses, a Pearson Product Coefficient was calculated between each of the BFI indicators and academic performance (Table 4). Conscientiousness was the only scale to show a significance (p<0.05)—albeit a negative one—when correlated with the first midterm exam. However, this correlation was less significant when Conscientiousness was compared with academic performance over the entire semester (p@0.06).

In analyzing whether learning styles as measured by the ILS can predict academic performance, there appeared to be no significance at all (Table 5).

Table 4: Pearson product coefficients between BFI factors and performance on the first midterm and cumulative academic performance

 

Exam #1

Academic Performance

Extraversion

Pearson Correlation

-.201

-.026

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.247

.882

Agreeableness

Pearson Correlation

-.184

-.202

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.291

.245

Conscientiousness

Pearson Correlation

-.374(*)

-.321

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.027

.060

Neuroticism

Pearson Correlation

-.023

-.087

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.896

.621

Openness

Pearson Correlation

-.057

-.091

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.747

.603

Exam #1

Pearson Correlation

 

.856(**)

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

 

.000

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 5: Pearson product coefficients comparing ILS styles with academic performance

 ILS Style

 

Academic Performance

ACT

Pearson Correlation

-.190

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.275

REF

Pearson Correlation

.186

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.284

SNS

Pearson Correlation

-.101

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.563

INT

Pearson Correlation

.101

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.563

VIS

Pearson Correlation

-.117

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.505

VRB

Pearson Correlation

.117

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.505

SEQ

Pearson Correlation

-.193

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.268

GLO

Pearson Correlation

.193

 

Sig. (2-tailed)

.268