• unlimited access with print and download
    $ 37 00
  • read full document, no print or download, expires after 72 hours
    $ 4 99
More info
Unlimited access including download and printing, plus availability for reading and annotating in your in your Udini library.
  • Access to this article in your Udini library for 72 hours from purchase.
  • The article will not be available for download or print.
  • Upgrade to the full version of this document at a reduced price.
  • Your trial access payment is credited when purchasing the full version.
Buy
Continue searching

The impact of teacher personality styles on academic excellence of secondary students

Dissertation
Author: Patricia Lee Stout Garcia
Abstract:
The focus of this study was to determine if there was a significant relationship amongst tenth and eleventh graders' (secondary students) Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) scores due to teacher personality styles. One model that was reviewed in this study was the five factor model. The study used the Big Five Inventory (BFI), to assess teachers' criterion referenced test. The second model that was reviewed in this study was the students standardized test scores. The study used two years worth of TAKS test scores for secondary students in grades ten and eleven. Finally, the study looked at the relationship between teacher personality styles and secondary students test scores. Secondary students' TAKS scores were compared to the teachers' surveys, BFI, in order to determine if there was a significant relationship to tenth and eleventh graders' TAKS scores due to the teacher's personality style. Results indicate that there is a significant difference amongst the academic excellence of secondary students based on teacher personality style. The results of this study suggest that further research should be conducted in this area.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv TABLE OF CONTENTS v LIST OF TABLES viii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1 Introduction 1 Statement of the Problem 3 Research Questions 5 Research Hypotheses 7 Significance of the Study 8 Assumptions 8 Limitations of the Study 9 Delimitations of the Study 9 Definitions of Terms 10 Organization of the Study 13 CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 15 Introduction 15 History of Testing 16 Standardized Testing 18 Current Standing 22 History of Personality 25 v

Personality Styles 30 Current Standing 35 Standardized Testing and Personality Styles 36 CHAPTER m. METHODOLOGY 38 Introduction 38 Research Questions 39 Null Hypotheses 40 Research Methodology 41 Research Design 42 Population and Sample 44 Instrument 45 Procedures 45 Data Analysis 47 Reliability and Validity 48 Summary of Methodology 50 CHAPTERIV. RESULTS 52 Introduction 52 Data Preparation 55 Population 57 Analysis of Data 57 Interpretation 104 Results Summary 104 CHAPTER V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS 108 vi

Summary, Conclusions, Recommendations 108 Analysis of Data Summary 109 Conclusions 113 Contributions 115 Recommendations for Additional Research 116 Summary 117 REFERENCES 120 APPENDICES 130 APPENDED A. Institutional Review Board 131 APPENDDCB. Institutional Review Board Approval 141 APPENDED C. Informed Consent 143 APPENDrXD. Survey Instrument 145 APPENDED E. Survey Instrument Consent Form 151 APPENDLX F. Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills Blueprint 157 APPENDED G. District Approval Letter 167 APPENDLX H. Letters to Teachers 169 VITA 171 vii

LIST OF TABLES Page Table 4.1 Demographic Information about Participants 59 Table 4.2 Grade 10,2008-2009 Student Demographic 60 Table 4.3 Grade 10,2009-2010 Student Demographic 61 Table 4.4 Grade 11,2008-2009 Student Demographic 62 Table 4.5 Grade 11, 2009-2010 Student Demographic 63 Table 4.6 Descriptive Statistics for Personality Styles of Teachers for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching English Language Arts at Grade 10 64 Table 4.7 One-Way ANOVA Results for Teacher Personality Styles for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching English Language Arts at Grade 10 65 Table 4.8 Descriptive Statistics for Personality Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching English Language Arts at Grade 10 66 Table 4.9 One-Way ANOVA Results for Teacher Personahty Styles for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching English Language Arts at Grade 10 66 Table 4.10 Post-Hoc Results for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching English Language Arts at Grade 10 67 Table 4.11 Descriptive Statistics for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Mathematics at Grade 10 68 Table 4.12 One-Way ANOVA Results of Teacher Personahty Styles for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Mathematics at Grade 10 68 Table 4.13 Post-Hoc Results for Personality Styles of Teachers for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Mathematics at Grade 10 69 viii

Table 4.14 Descriptive Statistics for Personality Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Mathematics at Grade 10 70 Table 4.15 One-Way ANOVA Results of Teacher Personality Styles for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Mathematics at Grade 10 71 Table 4.16 Post-Hoc Results for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Mathematics at Grade 10 72 Table 4.17 Descriptive Statistics for Personality Styles of Teachers for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Science at Grade 10 73 Table 4.18 One-Way ANOVA Results of Teacher Personality Styles for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Science at Grade 10 73 Table 4.19 Descriptive Statistics for Personality Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Science at Grade 10 74 Table 4.20 One-Way ANOVA Results of Teacher Personahty Styles for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Science at Grade 10 75 Table 4.21 Descriptive Statistics for Personality Styles of Teachers for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Social Studies at Grade 10 76 Table 4.22 One-Way ANOVA Results of Teacher Personahty Styles for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Social Studies at Grade 10 76 Table 4.23 Descriptive Statistics for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Social Studies at Grade 10 77 Table 4.24 One-Way ANOVA Results of Teacher Personahty Styles for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Social Studies at Grade 10 78 ix

Table 4.25 Post-Hoc Results for Personality Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Social Studies at Grade 10 79 Table 4.26 Descriptive Statistics for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching English Language Arts at Grade 11 80 Table 4.27 One-Way ANOVA Results for Teacher Personahty Styles for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching English Language Arts at Grade 11 80 Table 4.28 Post-Hoc Results for Personality Styles of Teachers for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching English Language Arts at Grade 11 81 Table 4.29 Descriptive Statistics for Personality Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching English Language Arts at Grade 11 82 Table 4.30 One-Way ANOVA Results for Teacher Personahty Styles for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching English Language Arts at Grade 11 83 Table 4.31 Post-Hoc Results for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching English Language Arts at Grade 11 84 Table 4.32 Descriptive Statistics for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Mathematics at Grade 11 85 Table 4.33 One-Way ANOVA Results for Teacher Personahty Styles for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Mathematics at Grade 11 85 Table 4.34 Post-Hoc Results for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Mathematics at Grade 11 86 Table 4.35 Descriptive Statistics for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Mathematics at Grade 11 87 x

Table 4.36 One-Way ANOVA Results for Teacher Personality Styles for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Mathematics at Grade 11 88 Table 4.37 Post-Hoc Results for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Mathematics at Grade 11 88 Table 4.38 Descriptive Statistics for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Science at Grade 11 89 Table 4.39 One-Way ANOVA Results for Teacher Personahty Styles for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Science at Grade 11 90 Table 4.40 Post-Hoc Results for Personality Styles of Teachers, for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Science at Grade 11 90 Table 4.41 Descriptive Statistics for Personality Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Science at Grade 11 91 Table 4.42 One-Way ANOVA Results for Teacher Personahty Styles for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Science at Grade 11 92 Table 4.43 Descriptive Statistics for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Social Studies at Grade 11 93 Table 4.44 One-Way ANOVA Results for Teacher Personahty Styles for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Social Studies at Grade 11 93 Table 4.45 Post-Hoc Results for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2008-2009 School Year Teaching Social Studies at Grade 11 94 Table 4.46 Descriptive Statistics for Personahty Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Social Studies at Grade 11 95 xi

Table 4.47 One-Way ANOVA Results for Teacher Personality Styles for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Social Studies at Grade 11 95 Table 4.48 Post-Hoc Results for Personality Styles of Teachers for the 2009-2010 School Year Teaching Social Studies at Grade 11 96 xii

LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 4.1 English Language Arts Student and Teacher Participants 97 Figure 4.2 Mathematic Student and Teacher Participants 99 Figure 4.3 Science Student and Teacher Participants 101 Figure 4.4 Social Studies Student and Teacher Participants 103 xiii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Educators are always looking for best practices in order to increase the learning and success of students in public education (Stewart, 2009). With the push for accountability in the United States, educators have started looking at ways to improve scores on state-mandated tests (Olson, 2000). Texas has aligned the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), the state curriculum, with the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) test, the current state assessment. Aligning the TAKS test with the TEKS allows public schools to have the same curriculum and alleviates discrepancies that could occur if this was not in place (Stewart, 2009). Texas Education Agency (TEA) provides a TAKS blueprint for teachers and administrators which illustrate how the TEKS support what is assessed on the TAKS (TEA, 2007). The TAKS test is designed to test students on what they are taught. Some educators believe that the TAKS test is a cumulative assessment, however it is not. This test is designed to assess what students learn based on the TEKS for that school year (TEA, 2007). According to Stevenson and Kritsonis (2009), the TAKS test is an assessment that is given yearly to all public school children beginning in the third grade, but there are key grades where students must pass the TAKS in order to graduate high school or be promoted to the next grade level. Ninth grade students take a reading and math TAKS while tenth and eleventh grade students take an English language arts, mathematics, science and social studies TAKS. Eleventh grade is a critical grade because the student must pass the TAKS with a score of 2100 (met standard) or better to graduate. Students 1

2 who fall short of this score (did not meet standard) on any area of the test are given more opportunities to pass before graduation; however, if one does not pass the TAKS test, the student is unable to graduate (Stevenson and Kritsonis, 2009). One percent of the students who are in special education can be exempt from testing, according to the U.S. Department of Education (Thompson & Crank, 2010). Typically, a school's special education population consists of more than 1% of the student population (Thompson & Crank, 2010). All other students in special education that are not in the 1% exempted category have to be tested on grade level or they will be counted as failures regardless of their disabilities (Bloomfield & Cooper, 2003). TAKS is an incredible task for public schools across the state and an unbelievable strain on students who do not make a passing grade on the test (Stevenson and Kritsonis, 2009). Stevenson and Kritsonis (2009) said that districts are challenged with the idea of how to help Texas students achieve success on the TAKS. This is an issue with schools throughout the state and most are looking for original and new ways to increase students' test scores and schools' accountability ratings, which are principally based on test scores. Kritsonis (2007) suggested that in order to increase academic achievement, the fundamental tasks of most educational institutions is to establish, define, and organize the curriculum. Kritsonis (2007) pointed out that there is more to learn, more to teach, and more to put in the curriculum than there is time available. Deciding what takes precedent posed a challenge for teachers while planning their lessons. Educators need to find a way to meet the needs of their students and prepare them for graduation from high school (Bard, Gardener, & Wieland, 2005). Bard, Gardener, and Wieland (2005) stated that the

3 cost associated with these tasks has been an ongoing concern for policymakers at both the state and federal levels. A study by Richardson and Arker (2010) suggested that personality styles need to be recognized in order to meet individual students' needs. Richardson and Arker (2010) affirmed that understanding personality profiles is important. Understanding personality profiles allows educators to be proactive in determining a better fit for each student (Richardson and Arker, 2010). Richardson and Arker (2010) also promoted that overall productivity can be enhanced by bringing together individuals with similarities. Davis (2006) and McCombs and Miller (2006) emphasized that good relationships between students and teachers often lead to increased student performance. They eluded that examining the relationship between the student and teacher would provide a good predictor of the learners' motivation to achieve academically. Statement of the Problem Educational reform needs to be addressed for many reasons. According to Morse (1992), significant adjustments to educational reorganization efforts are necessary to look at the needs of students. A concern facing education is the variety of personaUty styles that could either negatively or positively impact academic excellence in secondary students. Studies based on research need to be done in order to determine what personality style is most beneficial to secondary students based on academic achievement. Minimal studies have been done on the impact of teacher personaUty styles on the academic achievement of students. A study was done by Cooper and Benis (1967) looking at teacher personality, teacher behavior and their effects upon pupil achievement. The students' grades, using a non-standardized score were used in order to reflect

4 achievement. The personality assessment that was used was an ipsative approach (forced- choice scale). A study which was done by Levin (2006) made reference to assessing teacher personality and the effects on academic achievement but the focus of their study was on the leadership component and its effects on student learning. Another study found by the researcher was one that was done by Moscoso and Slagado (2004). Their research looked at negative types of personalities, which they refer to as the "dark side" and its effect on job performance. There were only a few studies resembling this one, however the study done by Cooper and Benis (1967) was most like this one. Cooper and Benis (1967) said that, "If certain patterns of teacher classroom behavior could be demonstrated to relate to pupil achievement (or the reverse) then we would be in a position to guide the development of that teacher's behavior which leads to pupil learning" (p.l). This study connected teachers' personalities and behaviors as factor for student learning. The scale that was used to assess a teacher's personality was the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS), developed in 1959. An additional study on personality styles noted a need for more studies on personality styles and the effects on academic achievement (Levin, 2006). The majority of Levin's (2006) focus was on the leadership component and its effect on student learning. Jacocca (n.d.) found that several people such as Lewin, a behavioral scientist; Fiedlers, leader of contingency theory of leadership; Vroom and Yettons, leaders of the normative decision-making model of leadership, and Houses, leader of the path-goal theory of leadership model, studied the relationship among leadership and personality styles. These studies proved to be inconsistent and contradictory (Jacocca, n.d.). Jacocca

5 (n.d.) emphasized that further studies need to be done because the majority of the studies were done during thel940s and 50s. Moscoso and Slagado (2004) researched personalities on the dark side and how those personalities related to job performance. Moscoso and Slagado (2004) focused on personalities that would commonly be construed as negative, hence "the dark side." The study by Moscoso and Slagado (2004) showed that there were seven types of personality styles that negatively impacted job performance, shyness, suspiciousness, sadness, pessimism, suffering, eccentricity, and riskiness. However, Moscoso and Slagado (2004) did not study the effects of a person's personality on another person's job performance. There was a lack of studies that showed if there was a relationship between a teacher's personality style and secondary students' academic success. There were no studies found that utilized standardized test scores and the BFI instrument in order to assess the effect teacher personality has on student achievement. Therefore, personality styles could not be ruled out as a contributing factor to the success or failure in tenth and eleventh grade students' academic achievement based on TAKS scores. This study focused on the impact of teacher personality styles on secondary learners. Research Questions 1. Is there a statistically significant difference in the English language arts success rate of tenth grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary English language arts teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010?

6 2. Is there a statistically significant difference in the mathematic success rate of tenth grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary mathematic teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010? 3. Is there a statistically significant difference in the science success rate of tenth grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary science teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010? 4. Is there a statistically significant difference in the social studies success rate of tenth grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary social studies teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010? 5. Is there a statistically significant difference in the EngUsh language arts success rate of eleventh grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary English language arts teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010? 6. Is there a statistically significant difference in the mathematic success rate of eleventh grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary mathematic teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010? 7. Is there a statistically significant difference in the science success rate of eleventh grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary science teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010? 8. Is there a statistically significant difference in the social studies success rate of eleventh grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary social studies teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010?

7 Research Hypotheses Hi There is a statistically significant difference in the success rate of tenth grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary English language arts teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. H2 There is a statistically significant difference in the success rate of tenth grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary mathematic teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. H3 There is a statistically significant difference in the success rate of tenth grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary science teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. H4 . There is a statistically significant difference in the success rate of tenth grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary social studies teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. H5 There is a statistically significant difference in the success rate of eleventh grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary English language arts teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. H6 There is a statistically significant difference in the success rate of eleventh grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary mathematic teachers for the school years: 20008-2009 and 2009-2010. Hy There is a statistically significant difference in the success rate of eleventh grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary science teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010.

8 Hg There is a statistically significant difference in the success rate of eleventh grade students on the TAKS test based on the personality style of secondary social studies teachers for the school years: 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. Significance of the Study With the push for accountability in the United States, educators have to start looking at ways to improve scores on state-mandated tests. One area which has not been studied is whether personality styles of teachers play a role in student success (Olson, 2000). Educators need to know if personality styles affect the success of secondary student's academic achievement. The study proposed that it is important to the educational success of secondary students that data be collected to determine teacher personality styles and applied against the mean test score obtained from students' Texas mandated TAKS test scores in order to determine if personality styles effected student success as measured by the state mandated TAKS test. Examining the results was important so that school districts have a better understanding of teacher personalities and were more capable of making informed decisions as to the future of secondary students. A gap in research prompted a descriptive research study in order to determine if further studies in the area of tenth and eleventh grade students' academic achievement on standardized assessment (TAKS) were impacted by an educator's personality style. This study was used to determine if further studies in this area are beneficial. Assumptions The following assumptions were posed for this study: 1. The first assumption was that the convenience sample that participated in the study answered questions voluntarily and were not influenced in any way.

9 2. The second assumption was that the population that participated in the study answered the questions honestly and was not influenced in any way. 3. The third assumption is that the convenience sample that participated in the study has had proper training to effectively teach students in their perspective core academic area. Limitations of the Study The first limitation of the study was that the school studied may not have represented the experiences of all Texas public schools. Secondly, the study was limited to teachers who were familiar with their personality styles and the impact on academic achievement of secondary students. Another limitation was that the study would seek to assess only the students in grades ten and eleven for the school years 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 who took TAKS and would not be the result of all student performance within the campus. However, the scores obtained for those students produced the data necessary to answer the research questions posed in this study. In addition, another limitation to the study was that there may have been more teachers who had similar personality traits based on the five factor model and fewer teachers who had other personality traits. Finally, the convenience sample analyzed was limited to only secondary teachers and did not seek input from students, parent, counselors, administrators, or the community. Delimitations of the Study The first delimitation of the study was that only secondary teachers who taught English language arts, science, mathematics, and social studies on one South Central Texas high school campus in a suburban area were surveyed. This study did not take into account prior learning which may have impacted the student's ability to grasp concepts

10 for which the student was tested; however, the study did acknowledge that each year TAKS testing is based on TEKS curriculum which is unique to that year (TEA, 2007). Another delimitation of this study was that the Five Factor Model instrument was chosen to survey personality styles of secondary teachers on one high school campus. In addition, the TAKS scores for two years from grade ten and eleven on one South Central Texas high school campus in a suburban area was compared to the personality style survey instrument that was administered. Finally, the survey instrument used was identified with a teacher's identification number in order to compare the personality style surveys to their secondary students' TAKS scores. Definitions of Terms Academic Achievement: Each state chooses its own standardized test to measure achievement, and each state defines its own level of "proficiency" on that test. Educators and policymakers have embraced standards as a way to ensure that all students, no matter what school they attend, master the skills and develop the knowledge needed to participate in a complex community. Currently NCLB (2002) calls for yearly progress in increasing the level of students and sub-groups toward a standard in reading, mathematics, and science (Emmerling, Rahlan, Neurohr, Purse, and Lindsay, 2006). Accountability: A political system that holds students, schools, or districts responsible for academic performance based on set standards (Elmore, 2002). Agreeableness: A person's personality consists of the tendency to be kind, tender, unquestioning, honorable, and affectionate (Anglin, 2005). Bureaucracy: This is a structure which delegates the rules and daily routines in the school setting (Somech and Wenderow, 2006).

11 Conscientiousness: A person's personality represents the affinity to be orderly, industrious, reliable, decisive, dutiful, competent, deliberate, and self-disciplined (Oliver, Naumann, and Soto, 1991). Dependent learner: In order to achieve, the learner needs someone to prescribe clear-cut objectives and straightforward techniques (Grow, 1991). Education: Is when one develops and uses knowledge from within and then continues drawing out that knowledge (Hill, 2008). Emotional Adjustment: A person's personality is often labeled by its opposite, "neuroticism," which is the affinity to be restless, apprehensive, dejected, and morose (Anglin, 2005). Extroversion: A person's personality represents the affinity to be extroverted, confident, energetic, and excitement-seeking (Anglin, 2005). Neuroticism: A person's personality represents the insecurity, emotionality, irritability, anxiety, anger, hostility, depression, self-consciousness, vulnerabUity, and impulsiveness (Oliver, Naumann, and Soto, 1991). Openness to Experiences (Intellectance): A person's personality represents the inclination to be imaginative, original, insightful and unselfish (Anglin, 2005). Personal Mastery: This involves the way institutes learn and continue to develop their work-related abilities (Chanpoe, 2000). Personality: This refers to how people differ but remain true to themselves they may be; conscientious or careless, kind or stern, placid or excitable, outgoing or withdrawn, excitable or placid (Harris, 2004).

12 Political System: This is a system involving legislators, governors, advocacy groups and professional organizations that set the accountability standards (Elmore, 2002). Relationship behavior: A leader engages in communication involving two or more, which encompassing behaviors such as listening, facilitating, and being supportive (Johnson, 1995). Self-directed Team: A group of employees are self-directed and are capable of managing themselves for day-to-day responsibilities with minimum direct supervision (Fischer, 1997). Shared Vision: A vision is developed to create a forward positive movement in development among organizational members (Chanpoe, 2000). Systems Thinking: This method involves the progression of balanced and imaginative solutions to problems as a way of creating self-protective resolutions and increasing an agreeable viewpoint by the majority (Chanpoe, 2000). Team Learning: The concept involves sharing ideas among organizational members through common exchange of ideas that will increase the development of group awareness and interest (Chanpoe, 2000). Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS): As mandated by the 76 Texas Legislature in 1999, the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) were administered beginning in the 2002-2003 school year. The TAKS measures the statewide curriculum in reading at grades 3-9, in writing at grades 4 and 7, in English language arts at grades 10 and 11; in mathematics at Grades 3-11; in science at grades 5,10, and 11, and social studies at grades 8,10, and 11. The Spanish TAKS is administered at grades 3-

Full document contains 187 pages
Abstract: The focus of this study was to determine if there was a significant relationship amongst tenth and eleventh graders' (secondary students) Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) scores due to teacher personality styles. One model that was reviewed in this study was the five factor model. The study used the Big Five Inventory (BFI), to assess teachers' criterion referenced test. The second model that was reviewed in this study was the students standardized test scores. The study used two years worth of TAKS test scores for secondary students in grades ten and eleven. Finally, the study looked at the relationship between teacher personality styles and secondary students test scores. Secondary students' TAKS scores were compared to the teachers' surveys, BFI, in order to determine if there was a significant relationship to tenth and eleventh graders' TAKS scores due to the teacher's personality style. Results indicate that there is a significant difference amongst the academic excellence of secondary students based on teacher personality style. The results of this study suggest that further research should be conducted in this area.