* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Katie Ross EDUF 7130 Dr. Jonathan Hilpert 5 September 2015
Survey
Document related concepts
Observational methods in psychology wikipedia , lookup
Behavioral modernity wikipedia , lookup
Thin-slicing wikipedia , lookup
Attribution (psychology) wikipedia , lookup
Conservation psychology wikipedia , lookup
Educational psychology wikipedia , lookup
Applied behavior analysis wikipedia , lookup
Abnormal psychology wikipedia , lookup
Parent management training wikipedia , lookup
Adherence management coaching wikipedia , lookup
Behavior analysis of child development wikipedia , lookup
Verbal Behavior wikipedia , lookup
Psychological behaviorism wikipedia , lookup
Insufficient justification wikipedia , lookup
Classical conditioning wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
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conditioning are used in the classroom and in teaching, but his principles are often regarded as controlling and outdated.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).