Download Behaviorism Essay

1
Timothy Meyers
PSY 370 - 04
Professor Burt Saxon
December 11, 2010
Final Essay
Topic: Some teachers believe the use of the behaviorist technique, such as positive
reinforcements and rewards promote learning. Others, including critic Alfie Kohn,
do not like these techniques at all. What is your position and why?
Woolfolk (2010) defines learning as the “process through which experience
causes permanent change in knowledge or behavior” (p. 557). Historically, there have
been many beliefs regarding how learning occurs most effectively. Aristotle (384-322
B.C.E.) cited three prime conditions for learning: “we remember things together (1) when
they are similar, (2) when they contrast, and (3) when they are contiguous” (Woolfolk,
2010, p. 200). For Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), “only a state of want,
experienced existentially, permits a spontaneous acquisition of knowledge” (picture a
Robinson Crusoe island experience) (Rohrs, May 1983). To John Dewey (1859-1952),
learning occurs in an “embryonic community” (school), where “social virtues” are
acquired in order that a student may make a “contribution to the renewal of social and
community structures” (Rohrs, May 1983). Applying science to education, Maria
Montessori (1870-1952) determined that the “child’s development obeys specific laws”
and learning takes place according to “the needs and interests of the children” at specific
stages of development (Rohrs, May 1983). To the cognitive theorist learning is “an
active mental process of acquiring, remembering, and using knowledge” (Woolfolk,
2010, p. 234). To the behaviorist, learning is “observable, measurable behavior”
controlled “through the manipulation of environmental conditions” (Price, 1999). My
2
opinion of behaviorism is that it has earned a respected place among the diversity of
approaches to learning cited.
The roots of behaviorist techniques are ancient. Aristotle’s third principle of
learning is behaviorist: learning occurs when things are “contiguous,” contiguity being
essential to learning by association in classical conditioning (Woolfolk, 2010, p. 200).
Woolfolk (2010) defines the principle of contiguity: “whenever two or more sensations
occur together often enough, they will become associated. Later, when only one of these
sensations (a stimulus) occurs, the other will be remembered too (a response)” (p. 200).
Aristotle’s concept of learning became the basis of classical conditioning used by Ian
Pavlov (1849-1936), the well-known Russian scientist whose experiments revealed how
“an animal learns about stimuli that predict important events such as food or danger”
(Rankin, Mary 31, 2002). Pavlov’s dogs learned to associate the sound of a tuning fork
with the arrival of food by the “contiguous paring of the sound with food” (Woolfolk,
2010, p. 201). The dogs exhibited conditioned response (“observable reaction to a
stimulus”) to a conditioned stimulus (“event that activates behavior”) (p. 200).
Father of operant conditioning and the Stimulus-Response theory, behavioral
psychologist B. F. Skinner expanded on Pavlov’s work with respondent conditioning in
dogs. Like Pavlov, Skinner viewed learning as changes in behavior that are “the result of
an individual’s response to events (stimuli) that occur in the environment” (Kearsley,
2001). However, unlike Pavlov, Skinner determined that human behaviors may be
“operants” as well as “respondents” (Woolfolk, p. 201). Characteristic of operant
conditioning is that “the organism can emit responses instead of only eliciting responses
due to an external stimulus” (Kearsley, 2001). Furthermore, Skinner (1950) found that
3
behavior, “or what a person does in a particular situation,” is “sandwiched between two
sets of environmental influences: those that precede it (its antecedents) and those that
follow it (its consequences)” (as cited in Woolfolk, 2010, p. 201). Changing either the
antecedents of the consequences or both can change behavior (p. 202).
Key to understanding Skinner’s Stimulus-Response theory is reinforcement.
Kearsley (2001) defines a reinforcer as “anything that strengthens the desired response.”
Reinforcers may be positive or negative. Woolfolk (2010) defines a positive reinforcer
“as strengthening behavior by presenting a desired stimulus after the behavior” (p. 203).
This desired stimulus might be “verbal praise, a good grade or a feeling of increased
accomplishment or satisfaction” (Kearsley, 2001). The negative reinforcer is “any
stimulus that results in the increased frequency of a response when it is withdrawn”
(Kearsley, 2001). Woolfolk (2010) cites the example of giving a class no homework for
appropriate behavior as an example of negative reinforcement (p. 202). Punishment, on
the other hand, is the “process that weakens or suppresses behavior” (p. 203). Examples
of punishment for inappropriate behavior in the classroom include afterschool detention
or removal of a privilege such as going out for recess (p.204).
There is no question that operant conditioning “has been widely applied in clinical
settings (i.e., behavior modification) as well as teaching (i.e., classroom management)
and instruction development (i.e., programmed instruction)” (Kearsley, 2001). For
example, teachers use antecedents proactively to change students’ behavior before the
student makes a mistake. These antecedents include: effective classroom delivery (EID)
(delivering clear directions, using statements rather than questions, standing in close
proximity to students); cueing (“providing an antecedent stimulus just before a specific
4
behavior is supposed to take place”); and prompting (checklists, reminders sheets, peer
tutoring) (Woolfolk, 2010, p. 206).
Furthermore, behavior modification, which may be defined as “the systematic
application of antecedents and consequences to change behavior,” is critical to most
classrooms regardless of the educational philosophy of the teacher/school (p. 207).
Behavior modification may be addressed through the following: (1) reinforcing positive
behavior with teacher attention and praise, (2) selecting reinforcers, (3) shaping, and (4)
positive practice (pp. 209-2010).
Attention and praise are very common behavior modification strategies used by
teachers in the classroom. However, O’Leary & O’Leary (1977) suggested that to be
most effective praise should (1) be contingent on the behavior to be reinforced, (2)
specify clearly the behavior being reinforced, and (3) be believable” (as cited in
Woolfolk, 2010, p. 208).
Regarding reinforcers, David Premack (1965) found that “a high-frequency
behavior (a preferred activity) can be an effective reinforcer for a low-frequency behavior
(a less-preferred activity)” (as cited in Woolfolk, 2010, p. 208). In other words, study for
the math test and then play outside if outdoors is a reward. The reinforcers do not have to
be complicated and may include: “the chance to talk to other students, work at computers,
or feed the class animals” (p. 208).
Shaping, a significant behavior modification intervention for students who
experience continued failure at a particular skill development, means: “reinforcing each
small step of progress toward a desires goal or behavior” (p. 210).
5
Finally, positive practice is an effective behavior modification strategy whereby
“students replace one behavior with another” (p. 210). This strategy may be applied
academically or behaviorally. A student may correct an error, for example, on a test and
practice it immediately, or a student may break a classroom rule and practice the correct
behavior (i.e. entering the room quietly without disturbing other students) (p. 210).
While acknowledging the “lasting legacy” of behaviorism, many would disagree
that it is the most effective way to promote student learning (Gardner, Fall 2000). For
example, to those who adhere to the cognitive view, “changes in knowledge make
changes in behavior possible” (p. 234). Cognitive theorists support the concept of
reinforcement, but for different reasons than behaviorists (Woolfolk, 2010, p. 234).
Specifically, for the behaviorist “reinforcement strengthens responses” (p. 234).
However, for the cognitive theorist, reinforcement is “a source of information about what
is likely to happen if behaviors are repeated or change” (p. 234).
Educator Alfie Kohn (1993) concurs with cognitive theorists, viewing
behaviorism as a “technique for controlling people” through extrinsic motivation rather
than the desired intrinsic motivation (as cited in Woolfolk, 2010, p. 225). Kohn (1993)
states: “rewards are ineffective because when the praise and prizes stop, the behavior
stops too” as does the interest in learning the material (as cited in Woolfolk, 2010, p.
225).
Multiple intelligence (MI) guru and Harvard psychologist, Howard Gardner, has
argued that everyone has it wrong, including Aristotle, Rousseau, Maria Montessori, John
Dewey, cognitive theorists and behaviorists (Gardner, Fall 2000). Gardner states that the
mind is not “blank slate” ready to absorb “all kinds of information” (Gardner, Fall 2000).
6
Instead, the mind has “initial structure and a set of diverse representational systems [i.e.
natural language, mathematics, and spatial relations]. It actively seeks to construct new
knowledge, but it can be effectively stymied by powerful yet erroneous early
representations. And finally it differs dramatically from one student (one parent and one
teacher) to another” (Gardner, Fall, 2000).
The debate over how we learn is a fascinating one, fraught with controversy, and
critically important to our educational system. While education might have “the
honorable purpose of producing law-abiding and productive citizens or, in old-fashioned
terms, virtuous citizens,” identifying how to achieve that goal is no mean feat (Lines,
Spring-Fall 2009). Consider for example, the different schools of thought currently
battling in contemporary education. To the Democratic-Liberal School, the purpose of
education is to promote “equality of opportunity for all” (Semel, 2010, p. 3) without
sacrificing excellence for all. To the Radical-Revisionist School promoting equality is
worthy but unrealistic, as a result of “stratification” wrought by economic advantage,
class status, and racial divides the must be addressed. To the Conservative School the
purpose of education is “to develop intellect” and promote traditional values of culture (p.
5). To these diverse perspectives, Price (1999) adds the behaviorist view: “the
overarching purpose of education is to ensure the survival of individuals, the human
species and society.” It is difficult to argue with survival as a goal. And certainly
behaviorism has a place historically, philosophically, and pragmatically in helping us to
understand the purpose of education and to explain how we learn.
In a reflective piece, Brent G. Wilson (1997) argued against abandoning
behaviorism (once in vogue and no longer so much) in favor of constructivism (now in
7
vogue), stating that the two perspectives are not mutually exclusive. I agree that we
maintain respect for what behaviorism can provide while being open to new discoveries.
Wilson (1997) reminded constructivists of the way behaviorist techniques promote
creativity:
Yet to help students become creative, some kind of discipline and
structure must be provided. Laurel (1991) cites Rollo May (1975), who
makes this point very well: Creativity arises out of the tension between
spontaneity and limitation, the latter (like river banks) forcing the
spontaneity into the various forms which are essential to the work of
art…The significance of limits in art is seen most clearly when we
consider the question of form. Form provides the essential boundaries and
structure for the creative act. In other words, an instructional strategy that
imposes structure may actually help learners make constructions needed
for learning…You can’t tell by looking only at the strategy; you have to
look at the entire situation and make a judgment. That is the role of the
teacher or instructional designer – to make professional judgments about
such things.
8
Works Cited
Gardener, H. (Fall 2000). The Complete Tutor. Technos: Quarterly for Education and
Technology, 9, 3.p.10 Retrieved December 06, 2010, from General
OneFileviaGale:
http://find.galegroup/gps/start.do?prodId=IPS&userGroupName=20100.
Kearsley, G. (2001). Skinner’s Operant Conditioning. Retrieved December 06, 2010,
from http://tip.psychology.org/skinner.html.
Price, D. D. (Winter 1999). Philosophy and the Adult Educator. Adult Learning, 11,
2.p.3. Retrieved December 06, 2010, from General OneFileviaGale:
http://find.galegroup/gps/start.do?prodId=IPS&userGroupName=20100.
Ranking, C. H. (May 31, 2002). A bit to remember. (Perspectives: neuroscience).
Science, 5573. P.16224(2). Retrieved December 10, 2010, from
http://find.galegroup/gps/start.do?prodId=IPS&userGroupName=20100
Rohrs, H. (May1983). Robinson Crusoe goes to school: six pioneers of modern
education. UNESCO Courier, p.20(4). Retrieved December 09, 2010, from
General OneFileviaGale:
http://find.galegroup/gps/start.do?prodId=IPS&userGroupName=20100
Semel, S. (2010). Foundation for education: The essential texts. New York: Routledge.
Wilson, B. G. (1997). Reflections on constructivism and instructional design. Retrieved
December 09, 2010, from http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~bwilson/construct.html.
Woolfolk, A. (2010). Educational psychology. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Merrill.