Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
School psychology wikipedia , lookup
Project-based learning wikipedia , lookup
Learning theory (education) wikipedia , lookup
Constructivist teaching methods wikipedia , lookup
Educational psychology wikipedia , lookup
Positive discipline wikipedia , lookup
Albert Bandura wikipedia , lookup
Differentiated instruction wikipedia , lookup
B. F. Skinner wikipedia , lookup
From Rats to RTI: A Look at Behaviorism and Reward Systems in Education The field of psychology and the field of education have long been connected. For centuries, researchers have experimented, analyzed, and theorized how people learn. Just as any domain evolves over time, different learning theories have waxed and waned in and out of popularity with the psychological world, but many theories are still applicable in aspects of the present education system. One such learning theory is radical behaviorism, a theory developed by B.F. Skinner. While there are some major differences between this theory and the theories of cognitive psychology, many educators employ ideas recognized by both behaviorists and cognitive psychologists. Response to Intervention (RTI), which eventually led to the development of Positive Behavior Intervention System (PBIS), is one system that has been adopted in schools that has behaviorist ideas behind it. RTI and PBIS both have components that can be made more efficient and consistent with the integration of technology. In this work, the connection between Skinner's theory of radical behaviorism and the systems in place in the 21st Century schools will be examined. To better understand the connection today, it is beneficial to first become familiar with Skinner's development of his theory. B.F. Skinner and Radical Behaviorism John B. Watson is considered the founder of behaviorism. According to Moore (2011), Watson believed that "psychology should embrace behavior as its subject matter and rely on experimental observation of that subject matter as its method." Behaviorism was more objective than many other sects of psychology at the time because it relied solely on what could be observed. (p.451) It did not rely on inferences, connections, or speculation, but used concrete evidence that could be witnessed by an observer. By 1920s, Watson had left academic psychology and other behaviorists were becoming influential, proposing new forms of learning other than classical conditioning. Burrhus Frederic Skinner, more commonly known as B.F. Skinner, is credited with the development of radical behaviorism. Skinner's theory "formulated as a functional relation between the behavior in question and the environmental variables." (Moore, 2011) Skinner believed that we do have a "mind," but that it is more reliable to focus on observable behavior rather than internal mental events. (Mcleod, 2012) Most behavior is observable as it takes place outside the subject's body, but some is only accessible to the person who is behaving. While Skinner's view was not considered as extreme as Watson's, the name radical behaviorism stems from the idea that behaviorism is a subject matter in its own right and is “an approach that is thoroughly and comprehensively behavioral and that thereby can include behavioral events which are not publicly observable.” (Moore, 2011) Skinner focused much of his work on looking at the causes of an action and its consequences. He believed that this was the best way to understand behavior. This approach was called operant conditioning. Operant conditioning states "Behavior which is reinforced tends to be repeated (i.e. strengthened); behavior which is not reinforced tends to die out-or be extinguished (i.e. weakened)." (Mcleod, 2012) There are three types of consequences that Skinner used in his studies: neutral, reinforcers, and punishers. These consequences are described in the table below: Three Types of Consequences in Operant Conditioning Neutral responses from the environment that neither increase nor decrease the probability of a behavior being repeated responses from the environment that increase the probability of a behavior being repeated. Reinforcers can be positive or negative responses from the environment that decrease the likelihood of a behavior being repeated Punishers weakens behavior It is important to note that there are two types of reinforcers: positive and negative. Positive reinforcement is where a consequence is found rewarding by the behaving subject. For example, if a student receives money for good grades on their report card, the student is more likely to carry out that behavior in the future. Negative reinforcement is where an unpleasant consequence is removed when the desired behavior is carried out. For example, if a student has to pay their parents money when they get bad grades, the student may work to get good grades to avoid paying his or her parents. Applications of Radical Behaviorism: Skinner Boxes and Teacher Machines Pairing consequences with a behavior can help to shape the behavior of the subject. Skinner applied his idea of operant conditioning in studying animals as well as humans. He is most famously known for his work in conditioning rats using "Skinner boxes." A rat was placed in a box that usually had a switch or some other task that was to be carried out. Skinner would use various consequences to see how it affected the rats' ability to accomplish the task. In his numerous experiments, Skinner also explored different schedules of reinforcement. For example, a rat might receive a consequence on every seventh time that it carried out the desired behavior. Some schedules were completely variant and did not adhere to a pattern. Such a random schedule is usually tied to positive reinforcment and has been compared to that of gambling devices. The payout is possible each time the behavior is carried out, but does not occur each time. Image taken from http://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html Another famous experiment that Skinner carried out made a direct connection to education and involved children. On their site, New Learning Online, Kalantzis and Cope draw attention to this unique study. They argue: The application of operant conditioning to education is simple and direct. Teaching is the arrangement of contingencies of reinforcement under which students learn. They learn without teaching in their natural environments, but teachers arrange special contingencies which expedite learning, hastening the appearance of behavior which would otherwise be acquired slowly or making sure of the appearance of behavior which might otherwise never occur. Skinner developed "teaching machines" that a student would use to complete a short math or word problem. The student would write their response and turn a dial to view the correct answer. Skinner's findings found that instant feedback led to correct behavior and to motivation. Each student was also free to move at his or her own pace. The teaching machines broke the learning up into a "large number of small steps where the student is almost guaranteed to succeed at each small step." The student only moves on to the next step when the prior step has been correctly completed. Criticisms of Behaviorism While there are many supporters for Skinner's work who agree with his findings, there also exists a large faction of critics. There are some researchers that claim that learning in animals is not comparable to learning in humans. Kalantzis and Cope (2012) summarize this argument: Critics of behaviourism have argued that human learning and animal learning are different in some important ways – in fact, in the ways that make us human, including factors such as self-consciousness and responsibility. As an educational philosophy, stimulus and response seems mechanical and manipulative. Meanwhile, the idea of innate intelligence has been thoroughly discredited, and particularly the idea that whole groups of people – races, or cultures or the poor – are naturally less intelligent than others. Also, it is now widely agreed that it is hard to make a distinction in practice between knowledge of things you have learned and intelligence that might be considered innate. (p.202) Cognitive psychologists are one major opponent of the behaviorist. Cognitive psychology focuses on mental processes such as memory. Moore (2013) describes the cognitive psychologist's criticism of behaviorism: Some cognitive psychologists contend one difference is that cognitive psychology is concerned with the unobservable phenomena that are held to underlie and therefore cause behavior, and in terms of which an explanation is appropriately sought. These cognitive psychologists further contend behaviorism is concerned solely with the publicly observable relations between behavior and stimuli in the environment, which are neither causal nor explanatory. (p.672) Because behaviorists only focus on behavior that can be observable, they ignore any internal occurrences that cannot be observed externally. In doing so, the cognitive psychologist argues that behaviorists are ignoring the changes that occur mentally to connect stimuli with responses, and in doing so are thus ignoring any cause or explanation for the behavior. Flanagan (1991) claims, "The behaviorist’s tactic of only attending to law-like connections between observable events is comparable to resting satisfied with the knowledge that the Big Bang is responsible for the present state of the cosmos and not giving a hoot about what has gone on in between.” (as cited in Moore, 2013, p.671) In the realm of education, there is also some worry about using extrinsic rewards to try to shape student behavior. The fear is that once the reinforcement is removed for a desired behavior, the student will lack the intrinsic motivation to engage in the behavior. Akin-Little, Eckert, Lovett & Little (2004) also point out that today's teachers are mostly using a cognitive theory of education with the emphasis on student-centered constructivism. This method "relies on internal, intrinsic machinations with no external reinforcement procedures being used." (p.345) The National Education Association published How to Kill Creativity (Tegano et al.) in 1991. This document stated: The expectation of reward can actually undermine intrinsic motivation and creativity of performance...A wide variety of rewards have now been tested, and everything from good-player awards to marshmallows produces the expected decrements in intrinsic motivation and creativity of performance...(making) them (students) much less likely to take risks or to approach a task with a playful or experimental attitude. (p. 119, as cited in Akin-Little, Eckert, Lovett & Little 2004, p. 357) RTI: Response to Intervention and Behaviorism Behaviorism is still seen in many schools even with so many criticisms of the theory. The implications of Skinner's ideas on schools has been outlined by Kalantzis & Cope (2012) in New Learning: Education is conceived as a process of behaviour modification. Pedagogy, in this conception, is a process of stimulus (for instance, introduce new content), followed by response (the student is asked a question in class or takes a test), followed by reinforcement (confirmation by the teacher of a right or wrong answer, or getting good or bad marks). Rather like the Fordist production line , learning according to the behaviourist model can be broken up into little bits, with a stimulus–response–reinforcement sequence driving each step in the production of learned behaviours. (p.200201) What is different in the present state of education is the demand for evidence-based systems to be in place. Data, research, and constant monitoring of the system, students, and outcomes are all requirements of these systems. Response to Intervention, or RTI, is one of these systems. Smith & Okolo (2010) explain that "“At its core, RTI features four primary components: (a) evidence-based classroom instruction, (b) student assessment with a classroom focus, (c) universal screening of academics and behavior, and (d) continuous progress monitoring of students.” (p.258) The OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports explains that RTI "grew from efforts to improve identification practices in special education. Simply put, it is a process of systematically documenting the performance of students as evidence of the need for additional services after making changes in classroom instruction.” Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports, or PBIS, is closely related to RTI and uses many of the same principles. OSEP states: "Both RTI and PBIS are grounded in differentiated instruction. Each approach delimits critical factors and components to be in place at the universal (Tier 1), targeted group (Tier 2), and individual (Tier 3) levels. Our goal is to describe the shared (identified in bold) characteristics of these approaches as a basis for highlighting how best to meet the needs of children experiencing academic and social difficulties in school.” Both RTI and PBIS use a three-tiered intervention system Differentiation, or individualization as it is sometimes called, allows each student to have their education experience catered to their needs. RTI and PBIS are both part of this differentiated approach. For example, if a student has a low reading level, certain supports will be put into place to help close the gap. Depending on the data collected on the student, usually gathered using assessments, the student may qualify for tier 2 or tier 3 interventions. A student who qualifies for tier 2 will receive the same instruction that tier 1 students recieve, but will also receive a small group intervention for reading. A tier 3 student will receive the same instruction as tier 1 and may receive the tier 2 intervention, but will also have an individual, more direct intervention. PBIS focuses on behavior rather than academics. PBIS systems can take several forms such as consistent vocabulary and expectations or token economies. Students can earn rewards for displaying desirable behaviors. Data on these behaviors is collected and interventions are put into place for students who qualify. As behaviors begin to improve, different qualifications or goals are set to receive the positive reinforcement. Akin-Little, Eckert, Lovett & Little (2004) connect this system to behaviorism stating: "...techniques that aid teachers in improving their management skills have existed since Skinner's (1953) seminal work on the principles of operant conditioning. Techniques based upon the use of extrinsic reinforcers (i.e., positive reinforcement) work in the classroom. These include verbal praise, token economies, group contingencies, contracts, and others (Maag & Kotlash, 1994)." PBIS works best when it is a schoolwide systematic approach. While teachers have their own systems in place to help manage student behavior in the classrooms, the unstructured time spent in common areas can often be a problem for student behavior. Wheatley, West, Charlton, Sanders, Smith & Taylor (2009) write, "School common areas may include hallways, lunchrooms, playgrounds, and buses or bus lines. Previous research suggests that misbehavior in school common areas accounts for approximately one-half of all problem behaviors in many schools.” Token economies can be quite successful in shaping behavior. One example of a token economy is at North Boone Middle School in Poplar Grove, IL. Students can earn "Viking Vouchers" for displaying correct behavior or meeting certain goals. Every two weeks on Friday in the cafeteria during lunch, the "Viking Vault" is open. This is a store where students can trade in their vouchers for rewards such as candy, school supplies, posters, gift cards, or other desirables. But what about the criticism of using extrinsic rewards to shape behavior? Akin-Little, Eckert, Lovett & Little (2004) argue: ...any detrimental effects of the use of extrinsic reinforcement can be easily avoided with the use of these guidelines. Rewards should not be presented for mere participation in a task without regard for completion or quality. Decrements have also been found in the literature when rewards are presented on a single occasion. This is not the most common method utilized in classrooms. In general, reward contingencies used in schools are presented repeatedly with appropriate thinning of schedules utilized when behavior change has occurred. School psychologists are advised to heed this advice when consulting and planning with teachers on the use of reinforcers in the school setting. (p.357) Incorporating Technology into RTI and PBIS Systems While RTI and PBIS have behaviorism at their roots, namely Skinner's idea of operant conditioning, it is the data collection and need for evidence before making changes or decisions that makes it more accepted. If decisions or the system is called into question, the data can be analyzed and the plan can be altered, rejected, or continued. Technology can make the data collection, data management, data analysis, and communication more efficient and reliable. At North Boone Middle School, data is collected and maintained using Google Drive. Spreadsheets can be edited and shared with teachers, administrators, social workers, counselors, even parents and students, if appropriate. Google forms can be used as point sheets or surveys to collect data on students daily or just when particular situations occur. When data is made easier to manage and collect, the interventions can be adjusted quicker to meet the needs of the student. Technology can also be used directly for the intervention itself, but it has been hard to support with concrete evidence. Smith & Okolo (2010) argue that more data and documentation needs to be collected on the use of technology for interventions: Thus, if technology-based solutions for students...are to be considered and integrated, they too must provide evidence of the effectiveness of a technology-based instructional practice… The use of technology applications for students with disabilities may continue to be limited within the RTI model unless the effectiveness of technologybased tools can be documented, furthering their use within multi-tiered models of instructional support. (p.258) Data collection can prove difficult when students are using technology. Smith & Okolo (2010) explain, "Teachers rarely observe students' performance when they are on a computer or mobile device and, therefore, may not be aware of when students encounter difficulties with a task or skill that requires teacher intervention.” (p. 269) While there is much work and research that needs to be done in this area, using technology as a form of interventions does show some potential. One great example of a technology-based tool that serves as a reinforcement system as well as a data collection system is Class Dojo. Class Dojo allows the teacher to set up a virtual classroom and assign each student a "secret code." This code allows students to access their profile and see their data. According to their website, "The teacher can easily award feedback points for behavior in class in real-time, with just one click of your smartphone or laptop." Teachers can project the virtual classroom when the projector is not in use, have students be responsible to monitor their own progress, or provide a time each day or week to allow students to see their points. This works extremely well in a 1:1 environment or when the virtual classroom can be projected so that students can have instant feedback. Classroom Dojo Screenshot This actually improves behavior." If the teacher desires, students can receive notifications about points that are added or subtracted from their profile. "Behavior-tracking analytics and reports can be shared with parents and administrators. There is no data entry needed. Ever." Student Data Report Class Dojo claims that there are many benefits for both teachers and students in using this system. For teachers, it aims to reduce the amount of time spent managing behaviors and provide "a painless way to focus on developing positive behavior over time, rather than just logging referrals once it is too late to intervene." For students, "research suggests the shorter the time period between an action and feedback for that action, the greater is the effect of the reinforcement. Specific positive reinforcement helps students develop a sense of purpose in the classroom, enhancing intrinsic motivation over time. By giving students visibility and data on their own behavior, Class Dojo makes class less disruptive and creates a more positive learning environment." If Skinner was still alive, he would approve of the use of Class Dojo. Like his teaching machines, it provides instant feedback to students allowing the reinforcement to lead to motivation. The marriage of his behaviorist ideas with the technology of today provides a systematic reinforcement system for 21st century classrooms. Conclusion The implications of Skinner's theory of radical behaviorism on 21st century classrooms can be seen in the schoolwide RTI and PBIS systems. With operant conditioning at the center and concrete data used as diagnostic evidence to drive decision-making, students are having their education tailored to their individual needs. The integration of technology has made the implementation of these systems easier to manage and more efficient in their changing as the student grows and improves. While behaviorism often carries a negative connotation in many education circles, the two systems for behavior management and academic decisions in schools would not exist in their present state without it. References Akin-Little, K., Eckert, T. L., & Lovett, B. J. (2004). Extrinsic Reinforcement in the Classroom: Bribery or Best Practice. School Psychology Review, 33(3), 344-362. ClassTwist, Inc. (2011). Class dojo. Retrieved from www.classdojo.com Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2008). New learning. Retrieved from http://newlearningonline.com/new-learning/chapter6/skinners-behaviourism Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2012). New learning:elements of a science of education. (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. McLeod, S. (2012). Skinner-operant conditioning. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/operantconditioning.html Moore, J. (2011). Behaviorism. Psychological Record, 61(3), 449-465. Moore, J. (2013). Tutorial: Cognitive psychology as a radical behaviorist views it. Psychological Record, 63(3), 667679. doi: 10.11133/j.tpr.2013.63.3.019 Response to intervention (rti) and pbis. (2014). Retrieved from www.pbis.org/school/rti.aspx Smith, S. J., & Okolo, C. (2010). Response to Intervention and Evidence-Based Practices: Where Does Technology Fit?. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(4), 257-272 Wheatley, R. K., West, R. P., Charlton, C. T., Sanders, R. B., Smith, T. G., & Taylor, M. J. (2009). Improving Behavior through Differential Reinforcement: A Praise Note System for Elementary School Students. Education & Treatment Of Children (ETC), 32(4), 551-571