Download Katie Ross EDUF 7130 Dr. Jonathan Hilpert 5 September 2015

Katie Ross
EDUF 7130
Dr. Jonathan Hilpert
5 September 2015
Operant Conditioning
Expanding on the behaviorist principles of Pavlov, Thorndike, and Watson, among others,
B. F. Skinner developed the principle known as operant conditioning in the 1930s. He is often
regarded as the “father of operant conditioning,” because he coined the term after a series of
experiments performed on animals in his famous “Skinner box” (McLeod, 2007). Operant
conditioning, according to Skinner, is a response to the environment that is reinforced through
consequences. Through the “Skinner box,” Skinner observed how reinforcing a behavior could
increase the likelihood of that behavior happening again. From his observations and experiments,
he learned that different types of consequences could shape behaviors in different ways. Even
today, Skinner’s principles of operant conditioning are used in the classroom and in teaching, but
his principles are often regarded as controlling and outdated. Ultimately, though operant
conditioning may have a place in the classroom, it should be used with an awareness of the
unforeseen consequences it may produce.
In reading about Skinner and his experiments, it is clear that he was focused more on the
“prediction and control of behavior” than on cognition or thinking (McSweeney & Murphy, 2014,
“A New Goal for Psychology,” para.1). This view of psychology and human behavior is very
simple in many ways, as it leaves out the concepts of free will and negotiation. For many years,
operant conditioning has been used as a method of classroom management. Teachers and school
administrators use the principles of positive and negative reinforcement to shape desired
behaviors from students. In this way, they seek to control the behaviors of the students by using
rewards or punishments to elicit the desired outcomes. Studies show that the more effective form
of operant conditioning in the classroom comes in the form of reinforcement rather than
punishment (Parish & Parish, 1991).
Some of the issues associated with operant conditioning become clear when looking at
how the repeated use of punishment affects students. Reinforcement typically leads to a positive
associate with a classroom, while punishment leads to a negative association with the classroom
(Parish & Parish, 1991). Because “as human beings, we tend to approach those things which are
associated with positive affect, emotions or feelings,” it would stand to reason that reinforcement
will lead to a more positive outcome for students (Parish & Parish, 1991, para. 14). Punishment,
on the other hand, will lead to more negative feelings and, thus, may cause more harm by
encouraging avoidance or fear of the classroom (Parish & Parish, 1991). Even with
reinforcement, however, there are dangers and problems. For example, students may become so
mechanical or conditioned that they do not really understand the “why” of their behavior, only
the “what,” which Parish and Parish (1991) describe as “following the rules without
understanding them” (para. 25).
In addition to the possible negative effects of repeated punishment or reinforcement,
operant conditioning also fails to take into account the fact that humans can learn in a variety of
ways, including solving problems with insight and through observation (McLeod, 2007). Again,
it leaves out a human’s cognitive abilities when observing their capacity to learn, and while
operant conditioning has many positive aspects in its ability to create motivation and to shape
behaviors, it cannot be used in a vacuum without leading to possible negative outcomes for the
learner.
Resources
McLeod, Saul. (2007). Skinner: Operant conditioning. Retrieved September 5, 2015, from
http://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html
McSweeney, F., & Murphy, E. (2014). The Wiley Blackwell handbook of operant and
classical conditioning. United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons.
Parish, J., & Parish, T. (1991). Rethinking conditioning strategies: Some tips on how
educators can avoid “painting themselves into a corner.” Journal of Instructional
Psychology, 18(3).