The Relationship Between Language Teacher Immunity and Personality Type of Iranian EFL Teachers

Research in English Language Pedagogy

دوره 10، شماره 3 - شماره پیاپی 20، آذر 2022، صفحه 490-516   

نوع مقاله: Original Article

شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30486/relp.2022.1951540.1358

نویسندگان

Bahareh Khazaeenezhad^* ؛ Maryam Davoudinasab

Department of English, Sheikhbahaee University, Isfahan, Iran

چکیده

Language teacher immunity is a novel concept in language teacher psychology that serves as a shield against the unavoidable hassles of teaching contexts. The current study aimed to fill the gap in the existing literature by employing a mixed-methods approach to find the relationship between Iranian EFL (English as a foreign language) teachers' immunity and their personality types. For the quantitative phase of the study, the data were collected through two questionnaires, teacher immunity by Hiver (2016) and the NEO-FFI-3 (NEO Five-Factor Inventory) by Costa and McCrae (2010), which were distributed among a random sample of 50 participants (19 males and 31 females) in various language institutes in Iran. For the qualitative phase of the study, an interview was conducted with eight EFL teachers through a phone call to reach in-depth information regarding teacher immunity. The findings indicated a significant positive correlation between teacher immunity facets and personality types. Teaching self-efficacy and conscientiousness was the most dominant teacher immunity facets and personality types. The current study would probably help EFL teachers know how to respond to various traumatic and detrimental situations in teaching English based on their personality and immunity types.

کلیدواژه‌ها

Iranian EFL Teachers؛ Language Teacher Immunity؛ NEO Five-Factor Inventory؛ Personality Types؛ Teacher Education

اصل مقاله

1. Introduction

For the past century, learners' learning has been the central indicator of instructional context. Scholars concentrated on learners' behavior and the ultimate learning outcome. Mercer et al. (2016) declared that "learner-centered" approaches and learners' psychology were the central focus of teaching over the past century. However, it might be an appropriate time to focus more on the "teacher-centered" approach and teacher's psychology in the field of English as a second/foreign language. The current educational shift from teacher-centered to student-centered education seems inevitable (Jeon, 2018). Teachers may encounter several disturbances and dilemmas within the classroom, instructional, and socio-cultural contexts which hinder teachers' effectiveness. It is worth noting that teaching is one of the world's challenging tasks. It requires devoting all the teacher's energies to the institutional context and receiving inappreciable attention from the educational environment. What makes teaching as a challenging career may be reasons such as learners' misbehavior, lack of social respect for teachers, demotivated learners, balancing diverse learning styles and needs, lack of time for planning, a lot of paperwork, lack of proper funding, lack of parental support, unsupportive principles, get burnout easily, and conflict with colleagues. For such reasons, it has led to the emergence of a novel concept by Hiver and Dornyei (2017), which is viewed as Teacher Immunity.

Humans are exposed to difficulties, challenges, threats, changes, limitations, and differences throughout their lives. To what extent does one try to adapt to these conditions, recover from them, demonstrate flexibility, and solve and respond to problems (Araghian & Ghanizadeh, 2021). Immunity is a defense system to protect the body and organs against harmful external factors. In this regard, the teacher immunity framework demonstrated that teachers in general and language teachers in particular, establish numerous defense mechanisms to diminish or impediment the detriment of their motivation and personalities. The emergence of language teacher immunity can be examined through the lens of teachers' personality types. Generally, Personality refers to an individual's way of thinking, feeling, and behaving, expressed in interacting with others. Teachers may have different personalities that might be helpful or harmful for the learners or the learning outcomes. From this perspective, little is known about English language teachers' immunity and personality types. The current study aims to shed new light on the immunity of English language teachers and attempt to gain insight into the English teachers' personality types. Moreover, to fill this gap, the present researcher examines the relationship between English teachers' immunity and their personality types in an EFL context in Iran.

 

 

 

2. Literature Review

2.1. A brief Look at Language Teacher Immunity

Immunity stems from the Latin word "immunize" and indicates the condition of resistance against something (Chiappelli & Liu, 2000, cited in Hiver, 2016). Across various fields, immunity is defined as a defense system to shield the body and organs against harmful internal and external factors. Teacher immunity is a novel concept borrowed from the field of medicine to demonstrate the protective armor developed by language teachers to defend against demanding and overwhelming situations. Innate immunity is the first line of defense that prevents infection and external attack. The system activates antibodies and moderates the normal inflammatory response to attacking microbes, which is considered tolerance. Language teacher immunity is comparable to biological immunity. As the immunity system shields the body against a harmful external barrage of attacks, the language teacher immunity serves as a protective armor against the unavoidable hassles of teaching environments and assists language teachers to stop and reflect on the event (Hiver, 2017). Language teacher immunity is vital in regulating how teachers behave and respond to stressful and adverse conditions they encounter (Carton & Fruchart, 2014; Hiver, 2015; Skinner & Beers, 2016). Teacher immunity leads teachers in general and language teachers in particular to overcome the unpleasant disturbances that might threaten their identity or motivation within the classroom (Hiver & Dornyei, 2017; Hiver, 2016b). Language teacher immunity takes on four major categories: productive (positive), maladaptive (negative), and identity or motivation within the classroom contexts (Hiver & Dornyei, 2017; Hiver, 2016 b). Language teacher immunity takes on four major categories: productive (positive), maladaptive (negative), immunocompromised, and partially immunized (Hiver, 2015). Productive and maladaptive lead the teachers to succeed in or fail to deal with various dilemmas in their classroom context. Immunocompromised demonstrated that there had been no developed coherent form of teacher immunity. Partially immunized, by definition, developed halfway components of teacher immunity. Productive immunity leads language teachers to resist chronic circumstances (e.g., the oppressive workloads imposed, unsupportive principles, and conflict with colleagues). In this regard, productive immunity protects language teachers' immunity like the biological immune system that responds to specific diseases through vaccinations. Regarding Hiver and Dornyei (2015), maladaptive immunity developed a skewed defense system through the embedded coping responses to threats. Moreover, maladaptive immunity decreases teaching effectiveness and hinders teacher development.

Productive and maladaptive immunity lead the teachers to succeed in or fail to deal with various dilemmas in their classroom context. Immunocompromised demonstrated that there had been no developed coherent form of teacher immunity. Partially immunized, by definition, developed halfway components of teacher immunity. Productive immunity leads language teachers to resist chronic circumstances (e.g., the oppressive workloads imposed, unsupportive principles, and conflict with colleagues). In this regard, productive immunity protects language teachers' immunity like the biological immune system that responds to specific diseases through vaccinations. Regarding Hiver and Dornyei (2015), maladaptive immunity developed a skewed defense system through the embedded coping responses to threats. Moreover, maladaptive immunity decreases teaching effectiveness and hinders teacher development.

2.2. Personality

Almost every day, people describe and evaluate other personalities. Although people assess other personalities, they may not know what Personality indicates. Personality derives from the Latin word persona, in which individuals may wear the personality mask to disguise their identities or project various roles. Personality is depicted as an individual's characteristic that accounts for fixed patterns of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that make each unique. Personality is the accumulation of various attributes that shape a significant individual. In this view, traits, a thought pattern, and emotions can make up a personality. In shaping an individual's Personality, genetic and environmental factors play a vital role. Personality types could be productive either in the teaching or learning process. It has been declared that once teachers know their personality types, teaching becomes easier to know learners' personalities (Duch, 1982; DeNovellis & Lawrence, 1983). Initially, McCrae and Costa (1985) untangled three main personality traits: Neuroticism (N), Extraversion (E), and Openness to Experience (O). Hence in the 1980s, McCrae and Costa (1985, 1987) claimed that five factors were essential to configure the comprehensive model. To establish the Five-Factor Model (FFM) in personality theory, McCrae and Costa (1988) associate these factors with Murray's (1938) needs instruments, Jung's types (McCrae & Costa, 1989), and Gough's folk concepts (McCrae et al.,1993).

Certain scales have been designed to assess these traits, and the scales were the compositions of factor-analytic and rational methods. Items were designed to tap into each trait, and trial items were intended to examine a large sample of volunteers. Using unambiguous items demonstrated that respondents could express themselves accurately, and data on the NEO scales have supported that assumption (e.g., McCrae et al., 2004). Since the Five-point Likert scale responses (from strongly disagree to agree strongly) provided accurate evaluation across the range of personality traits, the true/ false response format has been refuted (Reise & Henson, 2000). The first NEO Personality Inventory comprised 180 items and six scales for each of the five factors (Neuroticism (N), Extraversion (E), Openness to Experience (O), Agreeableness (A), and Conscientiousness (C) (Costa & McCrae, 1985). Four years later, the short version (NEO-FFI) for college-age and adult respondents was introduced (Costa & McCrae, 1989). The NEO-PI-R with new scales was developed in1992. In very few words, all the NEO inventories evaluate the five aspects (Neuroticism (N), Extraversion (E), Openness to Experience (O), Agreeableness (A), and Conscientiousness (C).

 2.3. Teacher Immunity and Teacher Personality

A considerable amount of literature has been published on teachers' personalities. Göncz (2017) examined the teachers' Personality in the educational process within the Five-Factor Model of Personality. Göncz (2017) investigated five studies in psychology, including teacher personality, teachers' professional identity, desirable and undesirable features, typologies, professional behaviors, and their influence on students. The findings indicated that teachers' personalities might be fruitful for studying this field's more comprehensible psychological theory in educational psychology. Rushton et al. (2012) conducted a study to reveal the relationship between pre-service teachers and their personality traits. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI; Myers & Myers, 1998) was administered to 368 pre-service teachers. Twenty-eight percent of the participants were inclined toward the Sensing, Feeling, and Judging typology. While ECE pre-service students favored Sensing, Feeling, Judging, Extroversion, and Intuition. Graduate students were inclined toward Extraversion, Sensing, Thinking, and Judging. Students in Master of Arts had no significant personality type.

Due to the newness of the concept of language teacher immunity, there have been few empirical investigations. Afzali and Esmaeli (2020) examined unanticipated events for the teachers in an English classroom in Iran. Therefore, the researcher categorized critical incidents in an English classroom and provided a collection of teachers' coping strategies. Fifteen participants were asked to narrate the critical incidents and the coping strategies they encountered in their classrooms. Grounded theory was utilized to analyze the data. The findings were productive for pre-or in-service teachers to enhance their resilience when facing demanding situations within the classroom. Saydam (2019) investigated how language teacher immunity develops and functions in Turkey. The researcher conducted individual and pair interviews to illuminate teachers' characteristics. For the quantitative part of the study, a questionnaire was distributed among 187 instructors. The findings indicated that the main teacher immunity types were productively immunized and the maladaptive immunized teacher and that most participant had high immunity levels. Songhori and Ghonsooly (2018) conducted a study to reveal the dominant teacher immunity type among Iranian English teachers and how they might develop their immunity. The questionnaire was administered to 230 English teachers to indicate the dominant immunity type among EFL teachers. Semi-structured and one-on-one interviews followed the survey to explore the developmental pathways of teacher immunity.

(1) What are Iranian English teachers' most dominant personality types?

(2) What are Iranian English teachers' most dominant teacher immunity types?

(3) What is the relationship between Iranian EFL teachers' immunity and personality types?

 

3. Methodology

The current study was based on a qualitative-quantitative design (Mix-methods) employed to gain insights into the relationship between English teachers' immunity and their personality types.

 

3.1. Design and the Context of the Study

     The current study was based on a qualitative-quantitative design employed to gain insights into the relationship between English teachers' immunity and personality types. For the quantitative phase of the study, the participants were 50 (19 male and 31female) EFL English language teachers recruited to develop a survey. To this end, they were asked to complete two questionnaires (language teacher immunity and teachers' personality types). Moreover, a qualitative method was conducted to investigate language teachers' immunity. In this regard, the participants who were zealous in participating in a follow-up interview were elite. Therefore, 8 teachers (2 Males and 6 Females) volunteered to participate in an interview. They were asked to answer in-depth interview questions.

 3.2. Participants

 A random sample of participants with 50 EFL female and male English language teachers was recruited from different language institutes in Isfahan. The rationale behind this selection was that the detrimental situations could be varied in different contexts (Farrell, 2008); therefore, the participants were selected from different institutes. Most participants' ages ranged from 21 to 72 in the study. The mean of the teacher experiences was 28.8. The teachers held the Bachelor of Arts (B.A.), Master of the Arts (M.A.), and Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in two branches of English: teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) and English translation (ET). As stated earlier, the mixed methods research design (qualitative and quantitative) was employed in the current study. For the quantitative phase of the study, the participants were 50 (19male and 31female) EFL English language teachers. To this end, they were asked to complete two questionnaires (language teacher immunity and teachers' personality types). The participants of this phase of the study were sampled through the survey respondents. The participants who were zealous in participating in a follow-up interview were elite. Therefore, eight teachers (2 Males and 6 Females) volunteered to participate in an interview. The present researcher selected those participants who were information-rich. Specific details of the 50 participants' background information were indicated in Table 1.

Table 1.

Participants Demographic Information

Gender (%)                               Teacher Education (%)        Major (%)                              TE

Male           Female            B.A.        M.A.      Ph.D.              TEFL     ET                2-5       6-10     10-20      More than20 years

 38%             62%              29.4        62.7         7.8                   82.4     17.6                  37.3        21.6         27.5              13.7

Notes: B.A. = Bachelor of Arts; M.A. = Master of Arts; Ph.D.= Doctor of philosophy; TEFL: Teaching English as a Foreign Language; ET=English Translation; TE= Teaching Experience

 

3.3. Instruments

The present section outlines the instruments used to collect the qualitative and quantitative data. Two questionnaires along with an interview were used in the study. For the quantitative phase of the study, the data were collected through two questionnaires as teacher immunity by Hiver (2016) and the NEO-FFI-3 (NEO Five-Factor Inventory) by Costa and McCrae (1989, 1992, 2005, 2010). Teacher immunity questionnaire comprised two parts. The first part focused on the participants' demographic information. The second part concentrates on seven scales, each with a 6-point response scale (1= strongly disagree; 6= strongly agree). The scales comprised teaching self-efficacy, resilience, Coping, burnout, attitudes toward teaching, openness to change, and classroom affectivity. Teaching self-efficacy (7 items; α=.82) demonstrated teachers' perceived self-efficacy, resilience (5 items; α=.82) measured teachers' capacity to deal with dilemmas in their career or life, coping (5 items; α=.78) measured teachers' handling of real-life dilemmas and urnout (5 items; α =.80) was caused by exhaustion due to prolonged stressful situations at work. Attitudes toward teaching (5 items; α=.85) indicated the teachers' feelings about teaching. Openness to change (6 items; α=.74) demonstrated the teachers' inclination towards novelty. Classroom affectivity (6 items; α=.81) indicated teachers' emotions toward teaching.

As previously stated, Costa and McCrae (2010) developed the NEO-FFI-3 (NEO Five-Factor Inventory), which consists of 60 items that assess only Big Five personality traits (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness). Furthermore, the NEO FFI’s internal consistencies reported as: N = .79, E = .79, O = .80, A = .75, C = .83. The NEO-FFI-3 responses include a five-point Likert scale (1= strongly disagree; 5 =strongly agree). In the qualitative phase of the study, an in-depth interview was designed. Language teacher immunity was the main body of the current interview. Moreover, the interview questions were based on relevant issues such as attitudes toward teaching, classroom affectivity, teaching self-efficacy, burnout, resilience, coping, and openness to experience.

3.4. Data Collection Procedure

Over the past several months, the global Coronavirus pandemic has impacted the world, government, people's lives, business, and academic research. Due to the Coronavirus crisis and unstable situations, face-to-face research may not be appropriate, but research could still be conducted. An online survey may be the best choice in this age of widespread internet access, mobile phone ownership, and internet communications. In this regard, the online survey was employed for the quantitative phase of the study. The present researcher used a Google Form web survey to collect data. Google form is a survey administration software that allows the researcher to collect information. Hence, by the allowance of the managers of the institutes, online questionnaires (Language teacher immunity and teachers' personality types) were distributed via Gmail among 50 EFL female and male teachers in different language institutes in Isfahan. Moreover, for the qualitative phase of the study to collect in-depth information regarding the relevant issues, a phone interview was conducted among 8 participants. The interview was held in English for 30 to 40 minutes, audiotaped, and then transcribed. Besides, the data were collected from September to October 2020.

 

3.5. Data Analysis Procedure

Since the current study had employed the mix-method, two types of statistics were utilized. The questionnaire data were analyzed through SPSS software (a series of Pearson Product Moment Correlation coefficients were produced) to examine the relationship between language teacher immunity and teachers' personality types. Moreover, the composite mean of each construct of teacher personality and language teacher immunity was calculated to analyze the second and third research questions. The study's qualitative phase was analyzed to identify particular phenomena and investigate the relationship between each individual's interview responses (qualitative) and their statistical survey results (quantitative). Each individual's response was examined with the whole sample as well.

 

4. Results

The current study examined the relationship between English teachers' immunity and personality types in Iran. Thus, the study was based on Mix-method. The results were presented in two main parts; 4.1 quantitative analysis and 4.2 qualitative analysis.

 

 4.1. Quantitative Analysis

A series of Pearson Product Moment Correlation coefficients were utilized to explore the relationship between Iranian EFL teachers' immunity and their personality types (see Table1, the matrix of correlations). It should be mentioned that each construct of teacher immunity (e.g., teaching self-efficacy) and teacher personality (e.g., neuroticism) was considered a latent composite. Then, the means of teachers' responses to questions of each questionnaire were estimated and used in all the subsequent analyses. Table 1 provides the magnitude of Correlations between Different Constructs of Iranian English Teachers' Immunity and Personality.

 

Table 2. The magnitude of Correlations Between Different Constructs of Iranian English Teachers' Immunity and Personality
Construct		N	E	O	A	C
Teaching Self-efficacy	Correlation	.30	.15	.20	.21	.10
	p value	.03	.29	.17	.15	.47
Burnout	Correlation	.30	.08	.07	.03	-.03
	p value	.04	.60	.63	.83	.84
Resilience	Correlation	.06	.13	-.09	.00	-.10
	p value	.71	.35	.55	.98	.48
Attitude toward Teaching	Correlation	.22	.26	.24	.15	-.07
	p value	.12	.07	.09	.28	.64
Openness to Change	Correlation	.14	.22	.21	.33	.17
	p value	.33	.12	.15	.02	.24
Classroom Affectivity	Correlation	.19	.23	.35	.24	.22
	p value	.18	.11	.02	.09	.13
Coping	Correlation	.16	.21	.23	.13	.04
	p value	.27	.14	.11	.38	.76

Note: N = Neuroticism, E = Extraversion, O = Openness to change, A = Agreeableness,

C= Conscientiousness

It can be seen from the data in Table 1 that there was a significant low, positive correlation between teaching self-efficacy and neuroticism, r = 0.30, p = 0.03. Furthermore, another low but positive and statistically significant correlation was observed between burnout and neuroticism, r = 0.30, p = 0.04. Two other positive, low, and statistically significant correlations were identified between openness to change and agreeableness, r = 0.33, p = 0.02, and between classroom affectivity and openness, r = 0.35, p = 0.02. As can be seen in Table 1, no other statistically significant correlations were found between other constructs of teacher immunity and teacher personality. The composite mean of each construct of teacher personality was calculated after determining which personality type was dominant among Iranian English teachers. The data were analyzed through mean and standard deviation to answer the second research question.

Table 3 Descriptive Statistics of Different Personality Types
	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
N	2.00	3.64	2.78	0.34
A	2.42	4.08	3.01	0.35
O	2.75	3.67	3.21	0.24
E	2.67	3.75	3.32	0.26
C	2.83	4.08	3.42	0.24

Note: N = Neuroticism, E = Extraversion, O = Openness, A = Agreeableness,

C = Conscientiousness

As shown in Table 2 (see Figure 1 for a pictorial comparison), these variables' mean and standard deviations were calculated to indicate the dominant personality among EFL English teachers. The result of the current analysis revealed that conscientiousness was the most dominant personality type (M = 3.42, SD = 0.24), followed by extraversion (M = 3.32, SD = 0.26), openness (M = 3.21, SD = 0.24), and agreeableness (M = 3.01, SD = 0.35). It should be mentioned that the least dominant teacher personality type was neuroticism (M = 2.78, SD = 0.34).

 

 

 

Figure 1.

The Means of Teacher Personality Types

In order to reveal the most dominant teacher immunity types among Iranian English teachers, the composite mean of each construct of language teacher immunity was run. As it was shown in Table 3 (see Figure 2 for a pictorial comparison of means as well), teaching self-efficacy was the most dominant teacher immunity type (M = 3.99, SD = 0.42), followed by coping (M = 3.92, SD = 0.59), Resilience (M = 3.79, SD = 0.69), openness to change (M = 3.57, SD = 0.65), attitude toward teaching (M = 3.53, SD = 0.55), and classroom affectivity (M = 3.35, SD = 0.48).  It should be pointed out that the least dominant language teacher immunity type was burnout (M =2.88, SD = 0.89).

Table 4. Descriptive Statistics of Different Constructs of Iranian English Teachers' Immunity
	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
Burnout	1.00	5.00	2.88	0.89
Classroom Affectivity	2.17	5.00	3.35	0.48
Attitude toward Teaching	2.80	5.00	3.53	0.55
Openness to Change	2.17	5.00	3.57	0.65
Resilience	1.80	5.00	3.79	0.69
Coping	2.00	5.40	3.92	0.59
Teaching Self-efficacy	3.00	4.86	3.99	0.42

 

Figure 2.

The Means of Language Teacher Immunity Types

 

 

4.2. Qualitative Analysis

The interview was conducted to collect more in-depth data regarding teacher immunity, and the interview was developed, reviewed, and modified by two experts, resulting in investigator triangulation. Participants' interviews were considered as data sources which resulted in methodological triangulation. All the interviewees were asked the same questions to maintain consistency among the interviewee, the integrity of the data, and the interview's credibility. In that sense, the researcher's bias would be minimized. Based on the previous, teacher immunity comprised seven facets: teaching self-efficacy, resilience, Coping, burnout, attitudes toward teaching, openness to change, and classroom affectivity. In this regard, the first interview question concentrated on attitudes toward teaching and classroom affectivity; the second question provided great detail regarding interviewees' teaching self-efficacy; the third interview question concentrated on teachers' burnout; next question focused on resilience and coping; the last interview question provided great detail regarding interviewees' openness to change.

 The data were examined to provide more meaningful information regarding teachers' immunity facets and establish a connection between the interview and questionnaire responses of the participants. The interview section investigated the interviewees' responses under each teacher immunity facet. Furthermore, the following statements investigated the findings in five main facets: 4.2.1. attitudes toward teaching and classroom affectivity; 4.2.2. teaching self-efficacy; 4.2.3. burnout; 4.2.4. resilience and Coping; 4.2.5 openness to change.

 

4.2.1. Attitudes Toward Teaching / Classroom Affectivity

The analysis of the first interview question revealed that all the teachers interviewed had positive emotions and attitudes toward teaching English. From this perspective, these eight interviewees possessed a robust teacher immunity regarding attitudes toward teaching and classroom affectivity. Considering the first interview question, which was related to attitudes toward teaching and classroom affectivity, some of the teachers' narrations were illustrated below:

Concerning its importance as an international language, teaching English satisfies me enabling others to communicate effectively globally. Well…. On another side, it makes me up-to-date, and you know being an effective English teacher needs a lot of study and research, although it goes to the nature of teaching and being a good teacher. Well… Teaching English keeps me alive and gives me a sense of being helpful to others. (Teacher 1)

Well…. that's not a tough question… I enjoy teaching English because it gives me boundless energy…you know what I mean. I think teaching English is a powerful tool because by teaching, I can influence other people and instigate changes in the world. Besides, it gives students a voice. There is no better feeling when you know that a student understands what you've taught them. That feeling will never get old. To put it in a nutshell, teaching English is a fascinating subject I can teach. (Teacher 2)

To me, teaching English is like an unfathomable ocean. Well…  As soon as I enter the class, I can see many different people with different backgrounds and thoughts... totally another world... in my book, teaching English is all about the relationship I need to stay alert and connect with various students. I was an English teacher need to know my students' learning and then employ a specific teaching method...  I think to be an effective teacher. We must be adaptable and inventive to keep the sessions beneficial to the students. (Teacher 3)

       As it is understood from teachers 1, 2, and 3 narrations, a positive attitude toward teaching English and classroom affectivity can be observed. From this perspective, teachers' positive feelings toward teaching English impact teachers' effort, goals, and level of aspiration. It is worth pointing out that regarding attitudes toward teaching and classroom affectivity. There is a strong relationship between respondents' interviews and questionnaire responses. In this view, the sum of the scores related to these two facets in the questionnaire of teacher 1 revealed that after teaching self-efficacy (total: 27), classroom affectivity was the highest score (total:20), and the score of attitudes toward teaching was 16. According to teacher 2, the dominant immunity type was teaching self-efficacy, scoring 30. Therefore, there is an association between teacher 2 responses and the means of language teacher immunity types. In this regard, the total means of language teacher immunity types in table 3 indicated that teaching self-efficacy was the dominant teachers' immunity type (M =3.99, SD = 0.42). On the other hand, the total attitude toward teaching English and classroom affectivity of teacher 2 were sequentially 21 and 19. From this perspective, this finding confirms the association between Teacher 2 attitude and classroom affectivity. In addition, the total means of attitude toward teaching classroom affectivity were M = 3.53, M =3.35.

Teacher 3 had the pleasure, eagerness, energy, satisfaction, sense of well-being, and pride in teaching English. Teacher 3 was concerned about students' learning and needs; therefore, it indicated that psychological well-being plays a crucial role for teacher 3. As can be understood from the results of the immunity questionnaire of teacher 3, the attitude toward teaching total was 30, and the classroom affectivity total was 26.

 

4.2.2. Teacher Self-Efficacy

Teacher self-efficacy is viewed as teachers' self-belief in their behavior and capabilities to accomplish the tasks. The second interview question was presented to reach in-depth information regarding teachers' teaching self-efficacy. The interviewees were asked how they could deal with the learners' problems. Considering the quantitative results of the study, it was indicated that teaching self-efficacy was the most dominant teacher immunity type (M= 3.99, SD = 0.42). The following responses were taken from the EFL teachers' interviews as shreds of evidence in this regard.

Most of the time, yes… if the learning problems are meant. I try to detect them as the first step to deal with their problems. Then I try to talk to the learners about their problems and ask if they think the same, or I ask them to talk about their problems. Then if I had dealt with the same problem before, I use my personal experience to handle the case, although individual learners are different from each other, and each may need a specific treatment. If I had not met the same problem before, I searched through different academic sources and thought deeply to find a solution; I also asked for my other colleagues' experience. (Teacher 1)

As teacher 1 stated, she can deal with the learners' problems by talking or sharing her personal experience with the learners. Due to the learners' problems, teacher 1 attempted to transfer her knowledge and personal experience to the learners and even search for their problems to help them achieve their goals; therefore, teacher 1 had a great sense of teaching self-efficacy. To this end, teacher 1 with a high sense of teaching self-efficacy could also impact the learners' performances. As a teacher, one asked about other colleagues' experiences, which would imply vicarious experience, which was a crucial factor in teaching self-efficacy. The vicarious experience was defined as the process of learning from other teachers' successful experiences. Considering teacher 1 demographic information, she had been teaching English for 20 years; therefore, it could mention that she had mastery level experience in teaching English. With regard to Woolfolk (1998), the most critical significant source of teaching self-efficacy for each individual is the mastery level experiences. From this perspective, teacher 1 response revealed that teaching self-efficacy beliefs were being advanced positively. Regarding teacher 1 responses, there was a great deal of overlap in her interview and survey responses regarding teaching self-efficacy; therefore, it could be mentioned that there is a relationship between qualitative and quantitative results of teacher 1. Despite this view, the most dominant teacher immunity of teacher 1 in the survey was teaching self-efficacy, with a score of 27. Furthermore, as previously stated, the dominant teacher immunity among 50 EFL teachers was also teaching self-efficacy (M = 3.99). The following quotation indicates the following interviewee's response:

Well… dealing with the learners' problems can make the already-intense demands of teaching all the more challenging. But as an English teacher, I try to use new ideas or methods based on learners' needs. Regarding the learner's problem, the solution might be different. As an example, if the learner by age 13 has a problem with speaking skill I as an English teacher, need to provide the circumstance for the learner to talk and use the language in real-life conditions; therefore, I provide some academic and fun speaking tasks which is appropriate for the learner's age and level. Briefly put, I tend to employ creative and fun tasks to deal with the learners' learning problems. (Teacher 2)

Regarding teaching self-efficacy, teachers with high self-efficacy tend to experience more new methods and ideas. Therefore, teachers with a robust sense of efficacy attempt to provide accurate tasks and accomplish them to meet the requirement of their learners in the teaching context. As shown in the teacher's two narrations, teacher two concentrated on learners' learning problems, and the teacher believed that appropriate tasks, new methods, and ideas could effectively deal with learners' problems. Based on the previous statements, teacher 2 possessed a strong teaching self-efficacy. The most significant role in teaching self-efficacy was mastery teaching experience. In this regard, years of teaching English would affect teaching self-efficacy. Teacher 2 had been teaching English for six years; therefore, teacher 2 could share the educational experiences and dilemmas toward learning English with the learners to help the learners to cope and deal with the problems. Teaching self-efficacy was one of the most dominant teachers' immunities rooted in teacher 2 survey responses. Hence, there was a great deal of overlap in teacher 2 interview (qualitative) and survey (quantitative) responses regarding teaching self-efficacy. Considering teacher 2 survey results, the total teaching self-efficacy was 30, indicating that teacher 2 had self-belief in her ability to accomplish the tasks and methods.

Moreover, there was a relationship between teacher 2 and the total mean of the survey results. Therefore, the most dominant teacher immunity among 50 EFL teachers was teaching self-efficacy (M = 3.99). The interview data further illustrated that teacher 3 had decreased teaching self-efficacy.

That depends on what problem the students face. I try to get them over the hump and try to encourage them to not think about their problems, at least during the time they're in my class. (Teacher3)

Regarding teacher self-efficacy, teachers with a high sense of self-efficacy solve academic problems easily. Moreover, teachers with an increased sense of self-efficacy tend to provide an appropriate method or solution to solve the learners' problems. However, teacher 3 did not provide a suitable solution to the learners' problems, and she did not attempt to help the learners. Teacher 3 tends to encourage learners to not think about any problems. As it is understood from teacher 3 interview, no matter what the learner's problem is, teacher 3 treated any problems in the same way to mitigate any harmful effects to herself. What needs stressing is that considering teacher 3 survey results, the total teaching self-efficacy was 19, which was lower than attitude toward teaching and classroom affectivity. Nevertheless, there was an overlap in teacher 3 interview (qualitative) and survey (quantitative) responses regarding teaching self-efficacy. Thus, either qualitative or quantitative responses indicated that teacher 3 was not high in teaching self-efficacy. Since the most dominant teacher immunity among 50 EFL teachers was teaching self-efficacy (M = 3.99); therefore, there was no relationship between teacher 3 and the total participants' results.

Not every problem, but I do my best to help them overcome their problems through learning English. For example, by discovering their particular problems, based on the learners' level, I would suggest them to read extra books, do the tasks or practice English more to develop their skills. Then, during the period, I would monitor their progress. (Teacher 4)

       As teacher 4 stated, she could not deal with every learner's problem but attempted to help them overwhelm the dilemmas. Due to the learners' problems and their level, teacher 4 attempted to provide appropriate extra tasks and books for the learners. Regarding teacher 4 quotation, after providing suitable tasks for the learners, teacher 4 would monitor the learners' progress to realize the learners' progress and T4 is less fastidious for her learners' errors. As shown in the teacher 4 narration, to meet the learners' requirements, teacher 4 had a specific and organized plan for them. From this perspective, teacher 4 had most of the teaching self-efficacy traits; therefore, it would imply that teacher 4 had a great sense of teaching self-efficacy. Teacher 4 had been teaching English for seven years; therefore, it should be mentioned that teacher 4 had the mastery level experience of teaching English. One way of summarizing this would be to say that there was considerable overlap between the survey and interview results of teacher 4. The dominant teacher immunity of teacher 4 was teaching self-efficacy (total:22). Moreover, the dominant teacher immunity among 50 EFL teachers was teaching self-efficacy (M = 3.99).

 4.2.3. Burnout

Burnout is viewed as teachers' emotional exhaustion and long-lasting stress. The interviewees were asked when and why they had been drained by teaching English. Considering the quantitative results of the current study revealed that burnout was the least dominant language teacher immunity type (M = 2.88, SD = 0.89). The interview data further illustrated that teacher1 and 3 had never felt drained within teaching English.

Not drained but a little tired. When I am busy with many classes from morning to evening, no matter what level or age group the students are, I feel a little tired as I do not have enough time to rest. In other words, I mostly feel exhausted physically and not mentally. I have never felt bored with teaching English. Despite physical fatigue, I always feel mentally energetic to teach English. (Teacher 1)

Ever!…. As I said earlier, teaching is an unfathomable ocean… So I've never felt drained so far, you know during my profession, I may face different dilemmas, but because I love teaching English, I've never felt exhausted.... I've got no clue what the future holds for me since I love my job. (Teacher 3)

The data revealed that teachers 1 and 3 were experienced. Teachers 1 and 3 had been teaching English for 20 and 10 years. As can be understood from the quotations above, none of these two teachers let the adversities accumulate; therefore, teachers 1(T1) and 3 (T3) tend to protect themselves from burnout. They believed that although they may encounter adversities in teaching English, they must make certain adaptions and move on. Survey data revealed that burnout was the least dominant teacher immunity among teachers 1 and 3; therefore, there was considerable overlap between teachers 1 and 3 and the total data. The total burnout was 13 and 18 for T1 and T3. On the other hand, regarding teachers 2, 6, and 7 who participated in the interview, they expressed that they required extra payment toward teaching English, as shown in the following statements:

I love my job, and I wouldn't change it for anything, but yes, some days I feel so exhausted that as soon as I get home, I sit down on my chair and try to relax. I don't have time to do anything but work, which is why I feel drained by my career. Even at home, I have to work. I need to check my students' papers and write the lesson plans based on my students' needs for each class. And more importantly, is the low payment. (Teacher 2)

I think feeling drained by teaching English is part of our job… Some terms are worse than others, and the reasons may vary. But the only reason that let me down is the low payment. I remember I had a class with a bunch of adult guys. For each session, I had prepared many grammars, song worksheet papers, extra books, and English movies by myself. Still, the manager did not notice my effort toward promoting the students' skills, and he even did not praise my job, let alone increase my pay. After all, I will not give up and do my best to teach English. (Teacher 6)

Yes, I had felt drained by teaching English, but it doesn't mean that I don't like my job… No... I love my job, but some reasons make me mentally tired, such as low pay. Teachers do everything for students, but the manager obtains more money!! And I think it's not fair at all. So, this is why I feel disappointed about my job sometimes. (Teacher 7)

Teachers 2, 6, and 7 were experienced teachers as well. Teachers 2, 6, and 7 had been teaching English for 6, 6-10, and 2-5 years. What needs stressing is that considering teachers 2, 6, and 7, survey data revealed the least dominant teacher immunity was burnout. From this perspective, the total burnout for teachers 2, 6, and 7 were sequentially 18, 19, and 14. However, in the quantitative phase of the study burnout was the least dominant teacher immunity. Teachers 2, 6, and 7 felt burnout from teaching English. Thus, there is no relationship between teachers 2, 6, and 7 quantitative and qualitative results.

 

4.2.4. Resilience/ Coping

Resilience is a significant facet in which teachers tend to endure, function effectively, and thrive despite encountering detrimental or adversities. Coping is viewed as regulating a demanding situation. Individuals with a sense of resilience had greater autonomy, self-efficacy, and coping-efficacy (Masten, 2009; Wu et al., 2013). Considering the quantitative results of the current study, the mean and standard deviation were indicated in the following sentence. Resilience (M = 3.79, SD = 0.69) and coping (M = 3.92, SD = 0.59). Considering the resilience and coping teacher immunity, the interview data further illustrated that resilience exists within teachers 1, 3, and 6. Besides, they had employed specific coping strategies toward detrimental situations.

It depends on the situation and whether I have control over it. Considering my passion and concern about my career, I first try to change the situation to a better one that is not detrimental. Although this is very idealist, I do my best. If I cannot change the situation and there is a chance for me to avoid it, I'll avoid it. If I have to stay in the situation and there is no control over it, I'll tolerate it, although it will affect my performance. (Teacher 1)

I try my best to examine the problem and handle the whole situation to find the best solution, but if I couldn't solve it, I have no choice but to cope with it." (Teacher 3)

If I face a detrimental situation, I attempt to settle down with the problem and then try to make a plan to eliminate the problem… I do my best to find the best way to resolve the tough conditions… and never give up. (Teacher 6)

Teachers, in general, encounter various detrimental situations within their profession; therefore, they must employ effective coping strategies to manipulate the traumatic situations. Teachers may have employed two coping strategies which are included as problem-focused coping or emotion-focused coping strategies. First, teachers 1 and 6 utilized a problem-focused coping strategy to change and diminish the stressor through an appropriate plan. Second, to escape from the detrimental situation without coping with the dilemma, teacher 1 employed an avoidance strategy in which avoidance is governed by emotion-focused coping. Using an avoidance strategy, teacher 1 tended to turn her attention away from the detrimental situation and expected that the stressor would resolve itself. When teacher 1 could not regulate the demanding situation, she employed an emotion-focused coping strategy. In this regard, teacher 1 endure and cope with the stressor. Teacher 3 tends to cope with the stressors; therefore, she employed an emotion-focused coping strategy. As stated in the literature review, resilient teachers can evaluate traumatic situations, employ coping strategies, and make appropriate decisions. Teachers 1, 3, and 6 regulated traumatic situations well and accomplished these stages; therefore, they had high resilience. To this end, the statistical calculation of teacher 1 indicated that the sum of resilience and coping scores were 18 and 19.

Furthermore, the statistical calculation of teacher 3 revealed that the sum of resilience and coping scores were 21 and 19. Teacher 6 results indicated that the sum of resilience and coping scores were20 and 24. Briefly, quantitative results of the current study indicated that the resilience score was adjacent to cope score as well (coping (M = 3.92, SD = 0.59), Resilience (M = 3.79, SD = 0.69)).

4.2.5. Openness to Change

             According to Hosgorur (2016), openness to change is defined as a process of transformation from a condition to one another through a planned or unplanned aspect. The interviewees were asked how they could adapt to changes and stressful career situations. Considering the quantitative results of the current study, the mean and standard deviation of openness to change was (M = 3.57, SD = 0.65). The following data illustrated that teachers were embracing changes with open arms.

It is obvious that there is no completely relaxing job, and no matter what your job is, it is natural to face some stressful situations. Knowing this fact makes it easier for me to cope with stressful situations. I also try to find the positive aspects of things, even stressful situations. I know that no stressful situation is permanent, and though keeping relaxed, planning well, being organized, and having a well-designed schedule, I can overcome the situation. About adapting to changes, I always welcome them, and I know changes are motives to be a better teacher. No learner likes a robotic teacher. So, first of all, I try to know about the new things in my career and field of study and then do my best to apply the practical, applicable, and useful for my learners based on their pedagogical and cultural needs. (Teacher1)

I like experiencing new and cool situations… I mean, not bad situations… fun and challenging one. For example, these days, because of the Coronavirus crisis, we as a teacher need to stay home and teach English online…  it was a new and challenging condition for everyone. Still, because I enjoy experiencing new things and technology is my cup of coffee, I like it…  because, through online classes, I can teach English through cool website, online games, and movies. I think we could be successful with creativity and a positive attitude toward changes. (Teacher 2)

According to statistical analysis, teachers 1 and 2 openness to change scores were 17 and 26. As previously stated, EFL teachers had a positive attitude toward teaching English, classroom affectivity, and openness to change teacher immunity. Some EFL teachers had low teaching self-efficacy and burnout immunity within teaching contexts. To cut a long story short, through acquainted EFL teachers with teacher immunity and personality types, they could manipulate the dilemmas effortlessly. Overall, in the following section, the findings of the study would be discussed with previous studies in the field.

 

5. Discussion

This study aimed to fingerprint the relationship between English teachers' immunity and personality types in a sample of 50 EFL (English as a foreign language) teachers in Iran. The second question in this study sought to determine the dominant personality types among Iranian English teachers. The third question in the study was to determine the most teacher immunity types among Iranian English teachers. Moreover, the study was based upon a mix-methods. The current study found a significantly low, positive correlation between teaching self-efficacy and neuroticism, r = 0.30, p = 0.03. Another positive and low statistically significant correlation was identified between openness to change and agreeableness. The last significant correlations were observed between classroom affectivity and openness to experience, r = 0.35, p = 0.02. Based on what was discussed in the previous section, no other statistically significant correlations were found between other constructs of teacher immunity and teacher personality types. However, the most dominant personality types among participants were conscientiousness (M = 3.42, SD = 0.24) followed by extraversion (M = 3.32, SD = 0.26). According to the qualitative phase of the study, the findings revealed that all 8 EFL teachers had a positive attitude toward teaching English, classroom affectivity, resilience, coping, and openness to change teacher immunity. In contrast, some of the eight EFL teachers had low teaching self-efficacy and burnout immunity within teaching contexts.

The current study aimed to demonstrate that realizing teachers' personalities could promote teachers' knowledge and educational process. Another relevant study had not explicitly referred to the relationship between teachers' immunity and personality types. Still, the features attributed to teachers' personalities in the study could be considered characteristics of the various domains within the Five-Factor Model of Personality. They might nonetheless be of interest to the present study. Therefore, there is a similarity between the attitudes expressed by the present researcher in this study and those described by Göncz (2017). To this end, Göncz (2017) believed that being acquainted with teachers' personalities could help educational psychology and process. Göncz (2017) analyzed five groups within the Five-Factor Model of personality framework. Five groups included: teacher personality, teachers' professional identity, desirable and undesirable features, teacher typologies, teachers' professional behaviors, and their influence on students. With regard to Göncz study, the findings revealed that realizing teachers' personality types could be productive in studying the comprehensible psychological theory of educational psychology. In contrast to current results, however, no evidence of dominant personality type was detected in Göncz (2017) study.

The study conducted by Rushton et al. (2012) revealed the relationship between various pre-service teachers and their personality traits through the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI; Myers & Myers 1998). The personality type in the Myers-Briggs Indicator was different from the current study. Therefore, the current study's findings do not support the previous research. It seems possible that these results are due to different questionnaires of these two studies. From this perspective, Rushton et al. (2012) exhibited that28% of the pre-service teachers were inclined toward sensing, feeling, and judging typology.

On the other hand, ECE pre-service students inclined toward sensing, feeling, judging, extraversion, and intuition. As previously stated, language teacher immunity was a novel concept; therefore, there have been few empirical investigations. Afzali and Esmaeli (2020) conducted a study to investigate unanticipated events for the EFL teachers in an English classroom. There are similarities between the attitudes expressed by Afzali and Esmaeli (2020) in the study and those described by the present researcher. Afzali and Esmaeli (2020) categorized critical incidents of EFL teachers and presented a collection of teachers' coping strategies. Based on the previous review, coping was one of the teacher immunity facets. According to Afzali and Esmaeli (2020), 15 teachers participated in the study and were asked to narrate the critical incidents, how they coped, and their resilience toward adversities within the classroom context. For data analysis, grounded theory was employed. The findings indicated that critical incidents were multifaceted in which the same critical incident may generate different coping strategies. Afzali and Esmaeli findings agreed with current results, which showed that EFL teachers could manage traumatic situations by employing some coping strategies. Therefore, coping strategies could be essential for teachers to deal with detrimental conditions in teaching contexts. Overall, the findings were productive for pre-and in-service teachers to promote their resilience when facing demanding classroom situations.

Saydam (2019) examined the development of language teacher immunity in Turkey. The present study's results agree with the Saydam study's findings, which revealed that most participants had high immunity levels, and the study was mixed-method (qualitative and quantitative). For the quantitative phase of the study, a questionnaire was distributed. Hence, for the qualitative phase of the study, in-depth interviews were conducted as well. The findings illustrated that the maladaptive immunized teacher was the main teacher immunity type. However, this result had not in line with the current study. This inconsistency may be due to different questionnaires. Songhori and Ghonsooly (2018) investigated the development of language teacher immunity and the dominant teacher immunity type among Iranian English teachers. The study was a mixed- method. In this regard, a questionnaire was distributed to 230 English teachers for the quantitative phase of the study. Hence, for the qualitative phase of the study, semi-structured and one-on-one interviews were administrated to explore the developmental pathways of teacher immunity. The findings revealed that the dominant teacher immunity among EFL teachers was maladaptive. However, the current study's findings do not support the Songhori and Ghonsooly research. Moreover, the study's qualitative phase results demonstrated that EFL teachers formed their immunity through four elements: self-organization, triggering, coupling, realignment, and stabilization. Based on what was discussed above, research on language teacher immunity and personality types is in their nascent stage and still needs to be investigated more.

 

5. Conclusion

The current study determined the relationship between Iranian EFL teachers' immunity and personality types. More specifically, it tried to identify dominant teacher immunity and personality types among English teachers in Iran. Most teachers encounter detrimental situations within the classroom and might be demotivated and lose their zeal for teaching; therefore, the main goals of language teacher education should lead the teachers to increase motivation, passion, patience, and innovation. In this case, it might be possible for the teachers to handle various disturbances and overcome the difficulties in the teaching context by realizing their immunity and personalities. It is noteworthy that this is the first study reporting the relationship between EFL teachers' immunity and personality types in Iran. In this regard, one of the issues that emerge from the study findings is to help EFL teachers be familiar with teacher immunity and personality types. Furthermore, one of the issues that emerge from these findings is that the study would probably help EFL teachers be aware of how to respond to various traumatic and detrimental situations in teaching English based on their personality and immunity types. As mentioned earlier, teachers could shape future nations by imparting their knowledge, skill, Personality, and behavior. Moreover, as mentioned in the results section, there was a low positive significance between EFL teacher immunity and personality types. Therefore, it would be productive to teach and employ pre-service teachers' findings to increase teachers' knowledge, motivation, and passion for teaching English. Although the study has successfully demonstrated a significant low positive correlation between EFL teacher immunity and personality types in Iran, the study was limited by some factors. First, lack of adequate time and participants numbers either in the quantitative or qualitative phase of the study. Thus, to generalize the study's findings, a large sample with adequate time was required. The second limitation of the overall research design is that, due to inadequate participants, the data was collected through a series of Pearson Product Moment Correlation coefficients, and the composite mean of each construct of teacher personality and immunity was insufficient. Thus, with greater participants, the future researcher could employ path analytic data analysis, which is more scientific and may shed better light on the relationship between English teachers' immunity and personality types. Moreover, further research could investigate the relationship between teacher immunity and teacher attrition, identity, or student perceptions of teacher effectiveness.

مراجع

Afzali, K., & Esmaeli, S. (2020). Analysis of Iranian EFL teachers narrated critical incidents and their productive coping strategies. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies,7(2), 1-27.  https://doi.org/ sid.ir/FileServer/JE/51018320200201

Araghian, R., Ghanizadeh, A. (2021). Teacher resilience: capturing a multidimensional construct. TESOL International Journal, 16 (5), 4-55. https://doi.org/tesol-international-journal.com/volume-16-issue-5-2021/

Carton, A., & Fruchart, E. (2014). Sources of stress, coping strategies, emotional experience: Effects of the experience level in primary school teachers in France. Educational Review, 66 (2), 245–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2013.769937

Chiappelli, F., & Liu, Q. N. (2000). Immunity. In G. Fink (Ed.), Encyclopedia of stress (pp.541546). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. https://doi.org/elsevier.com/books/encyclopedia-of-stress/fink/978-0-12-373947-6

Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. https://doi.org/researchgate.net/publication/240133762_Neo_PI-R_professional_manual

Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1988). From catalog to classification: Murray's needs and the five-factor model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 258–265. https://doi.org/jhu.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/from-catalog-to-classification-murrays-needs-and-the-five-factor-

Costa P & McCrae RR (1989). The NEO-PI/Neo-FFI manual supplement. Odessa, FL, Psychological Assessment Resources.

Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1989). Personality, stress, and coping: Some lessons from a decade of research. In K. S. Markides & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Aging, stress, and health (p. 269–285). John Wiley & Sons.

Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). The five-factor model of Personality and its relevance to personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 6(4), 343–359. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1992.6.4.343

Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. https://doi.org/researchgate.net/publication/240133762_Neo_PI-R_professional_manual

Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (2005). A Five-Factor Model perspective on personality disorders. In S. Strack (Ed.), Handbook of personology and psychopathology (pp. 257–270). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/ en-gb/Handbook+of+Personology+and+Psychopathology-p-9780471459071

Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (2005). Theories of Personality and psychopathology: Approaches derived from philosophy and psychology. In B. J. Sadock & V. A. Sadock (Eds.), Kaplan and Sadock's comprehensive textbook of psychiatry 1, pp. 778–793). Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. https://doi.org/ wp-content/uploads/2019/07/The-Five-Factor-Theory-of-Personality-Costa-McCrae.pdf

Costa, P. T., Jr., McCrae, R. R., & PAR Staff. (2010). NEO Software System [Computer software]. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. https://doi.org/ post.ca.gov/portals/0/post_docs/publications/psychological-screening-manual/NEO_PI-R.pdf

Costa Jr, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (2010). NEO PI-R: Inventário de personalidade NEO revisado e inventário de cinco fatores NEO revisado NEOFFI-R [versão curta]. São Paulo, SP: Vetor. https://doi.org/ omegalivraria.com.br/produtos/neo-ffi-r-inventario-de-cinco-fatores-neo-revisado-versao-curta-colecao/

DeNovellis, R., & Lawrence, G. (1983). Correlates teacher personality variables (Myers-Briggs) and classroom observation data. Research in Psychological Type, 6, 37-46.

Duch, R. G (1982). Introducing type theory into a school system. In G. Lawrence (ED.), People Types and Tiger Stripes. https://doi.org/amazon.de/People-Types-Tiger-Stripes-Psychological/dp/0935652876

Farrell, T. S. C. (2008). Critical incidents in ELT initial teacher training. ELT Journal, 62(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/ reflectiveinquiry.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Farrell-ELTJ-2008.pdf

Folds, J. 2008. 'An overview of immunity' in M. O'Gorman and A.D. Donnenberg (eds): Handbook of Human Immunology, 2nd edn. CRC Press, pp. 1–28. https://doi.org/ vdoc.pub/download/handbook-of-human-immunology-2nd-ed-3a5usg45f07g

Goncz, L. (2017). Teacher Personality: a review of psychological research and guidelines for a more comprehensive theory in educational psychology. Routledge, 4, 75-95. https://doi.org/ dx.doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2017.1339572

Hiver, P. (2015a). Attractor states. In Z. Dörnyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 20–28). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/researchgate.net/publication/269400183_Attractor_States

Hiver, P. (2015b). Once burned, twice shy: The dynamic development of system immunity in language teachers. In Z. Dörnyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 214–237). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. http://dx.doi.org/10.21832/9781783092574-017

Hiver, P. (2016a). The triumph over experience: Hope and hardiness in novice L2 teachers. In P. MacIntyre, T. Gregersen, & S. Mercer (Eds.), Positive psychology in SLA (pp. 168–192). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. http://dx.doi.org/10.21832/9781783095360-008

Hiver, P. (2016b). Tracing the signature dynamics of L2 teacher immunity: A retrodictive qualitative modeling study (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis). University of Nottingham, England. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12433

Hiver, P. (2017). Tracing the signature dynamics of L2 teacher immunity: A retrodictive qualitative modeling study. The Modern Language Journal, 101(4), 669–690. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12433

Hiver, P. (2018). Teach strong: The power of teacher resilience for L2 practitioners. In S. Mercer, & A. Kostoulas (Eds.), Language teacher psychology (pp. 231-246). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. http://dx.doi.org/10.21832/9781783099467-018

Hiver, P., & Dörnyei, Z. (2015). Language teacher immunity: A double-edged sword. Advance Online Access. Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv034

Hiver, P., & Dörnyei, Z. (2017). Language teacher immunity: A double-edged sword. Applied Linguistics, 38 (3), 405–423. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv034

Hoşgörür, V. (2016). Views of primary school administrators on change in schools a change management practices, Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 16(6), 2029–2055. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.6.0099

Jeon, Y. E. (2018). The effect of learner-centered EFL writing instruction on Korean university students' writing anxiety and perception. TESOL International Journal. 13 (3), 100-113. https://doi.org/files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1247310.pdf

Masten, A. (2009) Ordinary magic: Lessons from research on resilience in human development.   Education Canada, 49 (3), 28-33.

Mercer, S., Oberdorfer, P., & Saleem, M. (2016). Helping language teachers to thrive: Using positive psychology to promote teachers' professional well-being. In D. Gabryś-Barker & D. Gałajda (Eds.), Positive psychology perspectives on foreign language learning and teaching (pp.213229). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/ link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-32954-3

Reise, S. P., & Henson, J. M. (2000). Computerization and adaptive administration of the NEO-PI-R. Assessment, 7, 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/107319110000700404

 Rushton, S., Mariano, J.M. & Wallace, T.L. (2012). Program selection among pre-service teachers: MBTI profiles within a college of education. Creative Education, 3(1),16-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2012.31003

Saydam, D. (2019). English language teacher immunity: The METU case, (Unpublished master's thesis). Middle East Technical University.

Skinner, E. A., & Beers, J. (2016). Mindfulness and teachers' coping in the classroom: A developmental model of teacher stress, coping, and everyday resilience. In K. Schonert-Reichl & R. W. Roeser (Eds.), Handbook of mindfulness in education: Emerging theory, research, and programs (pp. 99–118). Springer International Publishing.

 Songhori, M., & Ghonsooly, B. (2018).  Language teacher immunity among Iranian EFL teachers: A self-organization perspective. Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(1), 127-143. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.24763187.2018.7.1.8.1

  Woolfolk, A. E. (1998). Educational psychology (7th Ed) Boston: Allyn & Baker. https://www.pearsonhighered.com/assets/preface/0/1/3/4/0134446801.pdf

Wu, G., Feder, A., Cohen, H., Kim, J., Calderon, S., Charney, D. and Mathé, A. (2013) Understanding resilience. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 7 (10), 1-15. https://doi.org/ frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnbeh.2013.00010/full