This post shares a working draft of the research proposal I have been developing across two semesters of my doctoral program at the University of Hartford. I originally drafted the proposal in EDD 825 last spring and have continued revising it in EDD 827: Leadership for Social Justice with Dr. Karen Case this semester. This is not my official dissertation proposal. It is a working document that will continue to evolve as I move through coursework, and the methodology section in particular needs more development before it reaches its final form. Alongside this draft, I was also asked to present on the proposal, and I have included a link to that presentation below.
My research investigates how introverted students experience systemic extroversion bias in higher education. Classroom discussions, participation grades, and group projects tend to reward students who speak often and visibly, which means students who learn through reflection, writing, and quiet observation often find their contributions less valued, even when their understanding is deep and their thinking is rigorous. The proposal draws on personality theory, Universal Design for Learning, and a constructivist worldview to argue that personality belongs in the equity conversation alongside race, gender, socioeconomic status, and disability, and that introversion is a meaningful dimension of learner variability that higher education has largely overlooked.
Click to view Presentation
Proposal Abstract
This study explores how introverted students experience systemic extroversion bias in higher education. While higher education often celebrates collaboration, verbal participation, and constant social engagement as indicators of success (Condon & Ruth-Sahd, 2013), such norms may marginalize students whose strengths lie in reflection, written communication, and independent thought. Drawing on theories of personality, learner diversity, and the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework proposed by Meyer, Rose, and Gordon (2025), this research investigates how extroversion bias operates as a form of social privilege that shapes both classroom culture and institutional expectations. Using a mixed-methods design, the study will combine survey data from college students with qualitative interviews of self-identified introverted college students to examine how extroverted norms influence perceptions of engagement, belonging, and academic performance. This study explores how colleges and universities may unknowingly reward extroverted behaviors. Its goal is to promote a broader view of inclusion and fairness in learning. The results will help educators design classroom practices and engagement strategies that recognize and support different ways students learn and take part in academic life.
Introduction to the Proposal
Higher education has long celebrated collaboration, verbal participation, and visible social engagement as defining markers of student success. Classroom discussions, group projects, and participation grades reward students who speak often, contribute visibly, and demonstrate enthusiasm outwardly. Yet these expectations rest on an unexamined assumption: that meaningful learning looks like extroverted behavior. Students who learn through reflection, writing, and quiet observation frequently find their contributions less visible and less valued, even when their understanding is deep and their thinking is rigorous. This mismatch between how students engage and how engagement is measured is not simply a matter of classroom style. It raises questions about fairness, belonging, and whose ways of learning are treated as legitimate within higher education.
The proposed study investigates how introverted students experience systemic extroversion bias in higher education and how this bias shapes their sense of belonging, participation, and academic identity. Grounded in personality theory, Universal Design for Learning, and a constructivist worldview, the study treats introversion not as a deficit to be corrected but as a dimension of learner variability that belongs within established equity conversations and literature. By examining both the cultural norms that privilege extroverted behaviors and the lived experiences of introverted students, the study positions personality as a meaningful factor in how inclusion is understood and practiced.
This proposal is organized into the sections that follow. The Problem and Purpose Statements describe the specific issue under investigation and articulate the study's objectives. The Theoretical Framework presents the three frameworks guiding the research: personality theory, Universal Design for Learning, and a constructivist worldview. The Overview of the Review of Literature previews three interrelated bodies of scholarship on personality and learner difference, engagement norms in higher education, and inclusive pedagogy, and identifies the gap this study addresses. The Key Terms and Operational Definitions section defines the central concepts used throughout the proposal. The Research Questions present the central question and sub-question guiding the study, along with the rationale connecting them to the conceptual framework. The Overview of Research Design and Methodology outlines the mixed-methods approach, including survey and interview data collection. The Significance of the Study explains the contributions of this research to educational practice, theory, and social justice. And the Conclusion summarizes the proposal and reinforces the alignment among problem, purpose, framework, and methodology.
Problem Statement
Higher education institutions increasingly position themselves as spaces committed to inclusion, equity, and the cultivation of diverse student voices. Institutional mission statements, strategic plans, and pedagogical frameworks frequently emphasize belonging and access for students across dimensions of race, gender, socioeconomic status, ability, and cultural background. Yet within the classroom, one dimension of learner difference remains largely overlooked and less examined: personality, and specifically, the systemic privileging of extroverted behaviors as the default mode of engagement. Participation grades, collaborative assignments, active learning strategies, and the general cultural expectation that learning be visible and vocal all reward students who communicate outwardly and with confidence. These practices, while often well-intentioned and grounded in pedagogical research on student engagement, rest on assumptions about what engagement looks like that may not reflect how all students actually learn.
For introverted students, who typically process through reflection, written expression, and quieter forms of participation, these norms can create barriers to recognition, academic confidence, and belonging (Condon & Ruth-Sahd, 2013; Godfrey & Koutsouris, 2024). Introverted students may understand course material deeply, produce thoughtful written work, and contribute meaningfully in smaller or asynchronous contexts, yet be read by faculty and peers as disengaged, underprepared, or insufficiently committed to the learning community. Over time, this misreading can shape academic identity, reduce willingness to participate, and contribute to a diminished sense of belonging within higher education (Tuovinen et al., 2020).
The problem persists in part because personality has not been meaningfully integrated into conversations about equity and inclusion in higher education. Literature on personality establishes that introversion is a stable and consequential trait (Costa & McCrae, 1992; Mammadov & Avci, 2025). Literature on classroom engagement examines how participation is defined and rewarded (Freeman & Rothwell, 2024). Literature on inclusive pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning offers frameworks for honoring learner variability (Meyer et al., 2025). However, these bodies of scholarship rarely speak to one another, and the specific question of how extroversion bias operates as a systemic barrier for introverted students remains underexplored. Without a clearer understanding of how this bias functions in practice, institutional efforts toward inclusion will continue to overlook a significant dimension of learner diversity.
Purpose Statement
The purpose of this study is to examine how introverted students experience systemic extroversion bias in higher education and to explore the ways in which classroom and institutional practices shape their sense of belonging, participation, and academic identity. Through a mixed-methods design combining survey data with qualitative interviews, the study seeks to understand how extroverted norms are perceived across a broad student population and how those norms are lived and interpreted by students who identify as introverted. The study also aims to identify practices that may reinforce or resist extroverted ideals, with the goal of contributing to more inclusive teaching and institutional practices that recognize personality as a meaningful dimension of learner variability.
Theoretical Framework
Higher education often rewards visible participation, group activity, and verbal confidence as signs of engagement. Research shows that students who identify as introverted can feel misunderstood in these environments (Godfrey & Koutsouris, 2024). Many report feeling pressure to appear outgoing to gain recognition or grades for participation (Tuovinen et al., 2020). This study draws on three key frameworks:
First, Jung’s (1921/1971) personality theory and the Five-Factor Model (Costa & McCrae, 1992) explain introversion and extroversion as natural, continuous traits. In learning contexts, these traits influence participation styles and energy levels. When classrooms favor external expression, introverted learners may be unintentionally marginalized (Mammadov & Avci, 2025).
Second, the Universal Design for Learning framework (Meyer et al., 2025) guides the study’s approach to inclusion. UDL emphasizes flexible engagement and expression, such as written reflection and asynchronous discussion, which recognize introverted learners’ strengths.
Third, the study is grounded in constructivism and adopts a constructivist worldview as its research paradigm (Creswell & Creswell, 2023). Constructivism holds that individuals build meaning through lived experience, reflection, and social interaction, which supports the study's treatment of introverted students as active interpreters of their educational realities. The constructivist worldview extends this tradition to the research process itself, shaping the decision to center participant voice through qualitative interviews.
Combined, these frameworks holistically position introversion as an important dimension of learner diversity and emphasize the value of reflection and personal experience in the learning process.
Overview of the Review of Literature
The proposed study draws on three interrelated bodies of literature that together frame introversion as a dimension of learner diversity often overlooked in conversations about equity and inclusion in higher education. These bodies include personality and learner difference, participation and engagement norms in higher education, and inclusive pedagogy and equity frameworks. Each body contributes a distinct layer of understanding, and their intersection reveals the gap this study seeks to address.
The first body of literature examines personality as a stable and measurable dimension of individual difference that shapes how students engage with learning. Rooted in Jung's (1921/1971) original theory of psychological types and extended through the Five-Factor Model (Costa & McCrae, 1992), the literature establishes introversion and extroversion as continuous traits rather than fixed categories. More recent work explores how these traits influence academic outcomes, teacher perceptions, and peer relationships. Mammadov and Avci (2025) synthesize evidence showing that personality meaningfully shapes teacher-student relationships, while Tuovinen et al. (2020) demonstrate that introversion and social engagement are not opposites but coexisting dimensions with positive associations to self-esteem. Godfrey and Koutsouris (2024) extend this work into educational settings, finding that introverted students often feel misunderstood and pressured to perform outwardly for academic recognition. Taken together, this body of literature establishes that personality is consequential in learning environments and that introverted students encounter distinct challenges tied to their ways of engaging.
The second body of literature addresses how higher education constructs, rewards, and measures engagement. Classrooms frequently treat verbal participation, group collaboration, and visible enthusiasm as evidence of learning, with participation grades and active learning strategies reinforcing these expectations (Condon & Ruth-Sahd, 2013). Freeman and Rothwell (2024) argue that such definitions of engagement narrow what counts as meaningful contribution, often excluding reflective or written modes of participation. This literature also intersects with research on classroom culture and institutional norms, which examines how unspoken expectations shape which students are recognized as engaged and which are read as disengaged, underprepared, or disinterested. Although this body of work raises important questions about whose ways of participating are valued, it rarely names personality as a factor worth investigating, treating participation instead as a pedagogical design issue disconnected from learner identity.
The third body of literature explores frameworks for inclusive pedagogy, with Universal Design for Learning as a central anchor. Meyer, Rose, and Gordon (2025) articulate UDL as a framework that accounts for learner variability by offering multiple means of engagement, representation, and expression. UDL's core logic holds that barriers to learning reside in the environment rather than in the learner, a position that aligns closely with social justice approaches to education. Research on culturally responsive and sustaining pedagogies adds further dimensions to this conversation by examining how classroom practices can honor a broader range of learner identities. However, equity frameworks in higher education have historically focused on race, gender, socioeconomic status, and disability, with personality rarely appearing as a recognized dimension of learner variability. This lack of representation identifies a clear gap in the field, suggesting a need to examine how personality, and introversion in particular, intersects with established equity research and practice.
Across these three bodies, a clear gap emerges. The literature on personality and learner difference demonstrates that introversion matters in educational contexts. The literature on engagement norms in higher education shows that participation is socially constructed and unevenly rewarded. The literature on inclusive pedagogy offers frameworks designed to account for learner variability yet seldom addresses personality as part of that variability. These bodies rarely speak to one another, leaving introverted students' experiences of systemic extroversion bias largely overlooked as an equity concern. The proposed study bridges these literatures by investigating how extroversion bias operates in higher education and by positioning personality as a meaningful dimension of inclusion. In doing so, the study contributes to a more expansive understanding of learner diversity and offers implications for faculty practice, institutional culture, and the ongoing work of social justice in education.
Key Terms and Operational Definitions
The following terms carry specific meanings within this study. Each definition reflects how the term is used in the context of the research questions, theoretical orientation, and conceptual framework guiding this work.
Introversion: A personality trait characterized by a preference for internal reflection, lower stimulation thresholds, and energy derived from solitary or small-group activity (Jung, 1921/1971). In this study, introversion is treated as a continuous dimension rather than a fixed category, consistent with the Five-Factor Model (Costa & McCrae, 1992).
Extroversion: A personality trait characterized by outward sociability, verbal expressiveness, and energy derived from external engagement (Jung, 1921/1971). As with introversion, extroversion is treated as a continuous dimension. This study does not position extroversion as problematic; rather, it examines how higher education privileges behaviors associated with extroversion as the default mode of engagement.
Extroversion bias: The systemic and often unexamined privileging of outward expression, verbal participation, and visible collaboration as the primary indicators of engagement, competence, and belonging in higher education (Godfrey & Koutsouris, 2024). The term systemic signals that this bias operates not only in individual faculty practices but also within institutional policies, grading structures, and cultural expectations. In this study, extroversion bias functions as the central construct under investigation.
Engagement and participation: The observable and interpretive behaviors through which students demonstrate involvement in learning. Traditional definitions emphasize verbal contribution, group interaction, and visible activity (Condon & Ruth-Sahd, 2013). Drawing on Universal Design for Learning (Meyer et al., 2025), this study expands the definition to include reflective, written, asynchronous, and other non-verbal modes of contribution as equally valid forms of engagement.
Sense of belonging: A student's perception of being accepted, valued, and included within an academic community. This study frames sense of belonging as shaped by whether students see their ways of participating recognized and affirmed by peers, faculty, and institutional norms. For introverted students, sense of belonging may be influenced by the degree to which reflective or quieter modes of engagement are treated as legitimate.
Learner variability: The range of ways in which students differ in how they engage with, process, and express learning. Drawing on the Universal Design for Learning framework (Meyer et al., 2025), this study positions personality, and introversion in particular, as a dimension of learner variability that has been underrepresented in equity-focused literature.
Universal Design for Learning (UDL): A framework for designing instruction that anticipates and accommodates learner variability by offering multiple means of engagement, representation, and action and expression (Meyer et al., 2025). UDL's guiding premise is that barriers to learning reside in the environment rather than in the learner. In this study, UDL serves as the framework through which extroversion bias is identified as an environmental barrier rather than a deficit in introverted students.
Constructivism: A theoretical tradition in philosophy and education that holds that knowledge is actively constructed by individuals through experience, reflection, and social interaction (Creswell & Creswell, 2023).
Constructivist worldview: The research paradigm adopted in this study, which extends constructivist principles to the research process by treating participants' interpretations of their experiences as valid sources of knowledge. This worldview informs the study's emphasis on qualitative interviews and participant voice.
Higher education: For the purposes of this study, higher education refers to accredited two-year and four-year postsecondary institutions in the United States, including both undergraduate and graduate contexts. Participants will be students aged 18 and older enrolled in such institutions.
Research Questions
Central Research question: How do introverted students experience systemic extroversion bias in higher education?
Sub-question: In what ways do classroom and institutional practices reinforce or resist extroverted norms?
Guided by the conceptual framework, these questions target the specific gaps identified in the study's purpose. The central question is phenomenological in orientation, asking how introverted students themselves make meaning of their experiences within environments shaped by extroverted norms. This aligns with the study's constructivist worldview (Creswell & Creswell, 2023), which holds that understanding emerges from participants' interpretations of their own lived experiences. Framing the question around experience rather than measurement keeps the focus on student voice and allows for findings that reflect the complexity of how bias is perceived, internalized, and navigated.
The sub-question shifts the focus from individual experience to institutional and pedagogical context, asking how the practices surrounding introverted students either reinforce or challenge extroverted ideals. This question is informed by Universal Design for Learning (Meyer et al., 2025), which locates barriers to learning in the environment rather than in the learner. By examining classroom and institutional practices, the sub-question aims to uncover the structural factors that shape the experiences named in the central question.
Together, the questions are designed to capture both the experiential dimension of extroversion bias and the structural conditions that sustain it. This dual focus reflects the study's theoretical grounding in personality theory, Universal Design for Learning, and constructivism, and supports the purpose of advancing a more expansive understanding of learner variability within higher education.
Overview of Research Design and Methodology
This study will employ a convergent mixed-methods design to explore both students’ perceptions and their lived experiences within higher education. Quantitative data will be collected through an anonymous online survey distributed to undergraduate and graduate students aged 18 and older, regardless of personality type. The purpose of the survey is to capture a broad view of how students perceive engagement, participation, belonging, and extroversion bias across learning environments. The instrument will include demographic items, a brief Big Five-based personality inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992), and a series of Likert-scale questions addressing comfort with participation, grading, and faculty expectations.
Qualitative data will be collected through semi-structured interviews with approximately fifteen to twenty-five students who self-identify as introverted or who demonstrate lower levels of extraversion based on the personality inventory. Interview questions will explore how participants experience classroom participation, institutional expectations, and the social dynamics of higher education.
The qualitative aspect deepens the interpretation of quantitative findings by centering participants’ voices and exploring how perceptions translate into lived experiences. This holistic approach supports a more complete understanding of how extroversion bias operates within higher education by connecting campus-wide perceptions with individual experiences.
Significance of the Study
The proposed study advances higher education research and practice in three connected ways. Each dimension of significance reflects the study's integration of personality theory, Universal Design for Learning (UDL), and a constructivist approach.
First, the study offers direct implications for educational and professional practice. Participation grades, discussion-based pedagogies, and group-centered active learning strategies are widely embedded in higher education and are often treated as default indicators of student engagement. By examining how these practices are experienced by introverted students, the study provides faculty and instructional designers with evidence to reconsider how participation is defined and assessed. Findings may encourage the adoption of more flexible engagement structures, including reflective writing, asynchronous discussion, small-group formats, and alternative participation pathways (Freeman & Rothwell, 2024). Such practices align with Universal Design for Learning and support a more expansive view of what meaningful participation looks like in higher education learning environments.
Second, the study contributes to existing knowledge and theory by positioning personality as a recognized dimension of learner variability within equity and inclusion frameworks. Equity frameworks in higher education have traditionally centered race, gender, socioeconomic status, and disability, with personality rarely appearing as a recognized dimension of inclusion. The study posits that extroversion bias functions as an embedded cultural norm that privileges certain learner dispositions over others, and that this bias deserves attention within broader conversations about inclusion. By connecting literature on personality and learner difference, engagement norms in higher education, and inclusive pedagogy, the study offers a conceptual bridge across research domains that have mostly remained disconnected. This integration represents a contribution to how the field understands learner variability and whose ways of engaging are valued within the academic spaces.
Third, the study has implications for institutional and social change, particularly in the context of leadership for social justice. Higher education institutions increasingly articulate commitments to equity, belonging, and inclusive excellence. Yet these commitments often overlook the quieter dimensions of learner difference that shape how students experience their academic communities. By naming extroversion bias as a systemic pattern rather than an individual limitation, the study invites institutional leaders, faculty developers, and policy makers to examine how unspoken assumptions about participation influence classroom culture, grading practices, and institutional expectations. Recognizing introverted students as part of the equity conversation supports a more inclusive vision of higher education in which all students, regardless of personality, have meaningful opportunities to learn, contribute, and belong.
Conclusion
Higher education has not yet meaningfully accounted for personality as a dimension of learner variability within its equity and inclusion frameworks. Although institutions profess a commitment to belonging and access, classroom and institutional practices continue to privilege extroverted behaviors as the default indicators of engagement, competence, and academic identity. For introverted students, this systemic extroversion bias can shape participation, confidence, and sense of belonging in ways that remain largely unexamined in current research and literature.
The proposed study responds to this gap by investigating how introverted students experience extroversion bias in higher education and by examining how classroom and institutional practices reinforce or resist extroverted norms. Grounded in personality theory, Universal Design for Learning, and a constructivist worldview, the study positions introversion as a meaningful dimension of learner diversity that deserves attention within established equity frameworks. The convergent mixed-methods design combines survey data on student perceptions with qualitative interviews that center the voices of introverted students, allowing the study to capture both the prevalence of extroversion bias across the student population and the depth of how it is experienced individually.
The alignment among the study's problem, purpose, framework, and methodology reflects a deliberate design intended to generate findings that are both credible and practically useful. By naming extroversion bias as a systemic pattern rather than an individual limitation, and by positioning personality within the equity landscape, the study contributes to a more inclusive understanding of learner variability in higher education. The ultimate goal is to support faculty, institutional leaders, and the wider academic community in imagining and enacting practices in which introverted and extroverted learners alike have meaningful opportunities to engage, contribute, and belong.
References
Condon, M., & Ruth-Sahd, L. (2013). Responding to introverted and shy students: Best practice guidelines for educators and advisors. Open Journal of Nursing, 3, 503–515. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojn.2013.37069
Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Godfrey, E., & Koutsouris, G. (2024). Is personality overlooked in educational psychology? Educational experiences of secondary-school students with introverted personality styles. Educational Psychology in Practice, 40(2), 159–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2023.2287524
Jung, C. G. (1971). Psychological types (R. F. C. Hull, Trans.). Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1921). (The Collected Works of C. G. Jung, Vol. 6).
Mammadov, S., & Avci, A. H. (2025). A meta-analytic review of personality and teacher-student relationships. Journal of Personality, 93(4), 949–972. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12986
Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2025). Universal design for learning: Principles, framework, and practice (3rd ed.). CAST Professional Publishing.
Tuovinen, S., Tang, X., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2020). Introversion and social engagement: Scale validation, their interaction, and positive association with self-esteem. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 590748. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.590748
Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Godfrey, E., & Koutsouris, G. (2024). Is personality overlooked in educational psychology? Educational experiences of secondary-school students with introverted personality styles. Educational Psychology in Practice, 40(2), 159–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2023.2287524
Jung, C. G. (1971). Psychological types (R. F. C. Hull, Trans.). Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1921). (The Collected Works of C. G. Jung, Vol. 6).
Mammadov, S., & Avci, A. H. (2025). A meta-analytic review of personality and teacher-student relationships. Journal of Personality, 93(4), 949–972. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12986
Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2025). Universal design for learning: Principles, framework, and practice (3rd ed.). CAST Professional Publishing.
Tuovinen, S., Tang, X., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2020). Introversion and social engagement: Scale validation, their interaction, and positive association with self-esteem. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 590748. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.590748
Tags
EdD