I’m not sure what to make of what follows, except to say it’s perhaps a good example of trying to use outdated models in today’s world. (That’s if this is serious) Here’s a brief quote from an article
entitled:

Learning Styles
Freud’s Seminal Contribution to Learning Styles

“Anal learners have always been misunderstood and harshly treated in school. Learning blockages are a common problem, and teaching that does not allow for their specific zone of proximal development often goes to waste. Anal students have been discriminated against, and their innocent attempts to communicate anally have been met with disdain, disgust and punishment. Teachers must now become alert to the needs of such students” The article also talks about the needs of phallic learners and oral learners and the implications for instructions. Might I also recommend:

Parents of Nasal Learners Demand Odor-Based Curriculum available at:
http://www.runet.edu/~thompson/obias.html

As an aside, if folks don’t know, Freud and Jung were contemporaries before they split somewhat acrimoniously. Both are credited with historical contributions, but many of the specifics of their work are recognized as a product of their times, and no longer recognized as accurate, or credible.

As an additional aside, much about their work has been criticized as sexist, and in the case of Jung racist (Jung has been accused of being a Nazi sympathizer). Jung’s views on woman and various races is rather disturbing, and is related to the belief in “hard wiring”, something that was brought up in a previous message. Worth some internet searching if that’s something of interest.