Behaviourist Principles in Contemporary Classrooms - Essay Example

? BEHAVIOURIST PRINCIPLES IN CONTEMPORARY ROOMS College: Behaviorist Principles in Contemporary room The school of psychology has for a long time now made considerable attempts to redefine the learning process its endeavor to improve study programs in modern schools. Behaviorist principles are one of the oldest schools of thought that has gained a wide application in the education sector to help teachers and trainers to model student behavior and elicit a better comprehension of the educational substance. The proponents of behaviorism figured out that observable human behavior can be stimulated through encouragement and reinforcement and that this response can work best in the learning process. However, criticism of the behaviorist principles has surfaced with some psychologist expressing the weakness of this procedure of learning in the modern school environment. The purpose of this essay is to evaluate whether or not the behaviorist principles are still relevant in the contemporary classroom. The origin of the behaviorist principles is dated back to the 20th century when psychologist such as Pavlov conducted experimental research to investigate the stimulation of specific human behavior. Pavlov conditioned his test dog by providing food at a specific time during the day, after ringing a bell, and observing its reaction at that particular time of the day. After sometime, Pavlov observed that the dog would produce suggestive sound and salivate immediately after the bell at exactly the time that he served it with food and in turn concluded that the dog had associated the bell with food. Theorists such as Watson and Skinner have also supported the idea of Pavlov by expressing their opinion regarding development of personal human behavior (Shield, p. 13). The idea of these scholars is that it is possible to stimulate observable human behavior by introducing a conditional environment. Although these theorists agree that there learning is a mental process, they are of the opinion that it is only possible to condition only the observable behavior of a person (Jonassen, pp. 1-23). The idea of these theorists has come to be integrated into the learning process to help improve the learners experience by stimulating their learning experience. The principles of behaviorism are based on classical and operant conditionings which may philosopher have come to regard as the roots of these principles. In classical conditioning, for instance in Pavlov experiment, a stimulus, in this case a bell, is used to trigger a natural response from a human being (Camp &Doolittle, p. 12). The impact of this kind of conditioning is that a trigger, not usually associated with a particular natural response is learnt by a human being through experience and becomes associated with some natural phenomenon. On the other hand, operant conditioning relies on the reinforcement of a particular response to a particular stimulus in, which can be termed as an enhancement of the classical conditioning. For instance, if a mother gets used to feeding a baby whenever it cries, the baby will learn that after crying it will be fed. From this perspective, these proponents of behaviorism came to believe learning process can be enhanced by eliciting responses from students and reinforcing these responses. According to Laurete (p. 5), the learning process can be stimulated by adopting the concept of stimulation that was developed by behaviorists. The foundation of the integrated learning system is to enhance the learning by using different approaches in transferring knowledge to the students in the classroom. Two approaches have been upheld as the superior means of transferring knowledge to the learner in any learning environment; first, learning through experience that aims at enhancing the learning process through exposing students to various experiences and secondly inducing students to learn through provision of stimulus. In integrated learning system, the learners are subjected to practical tasks that will help them to understand and retain knowledge in their mind. In addition, they are trained to have an epistemological understanding of right and wrong behaviors by reinforcement actions. For instance, they will be punished for wrong actions and rewarded for affirmative actions, and hence allow them to learn right and wrong. This means that they will associate wrong behaviors with punishments and right behaviors with rewards and consequently learn to do more right than wrong. The idea of these philosophers is that learning process cannot be induced through one particular method but only through mixed teaching techniques. Another scholar who has backed up the use of behaviorist principles in classroom is Driscol (p. 3) who defined learning as a “persisting change in performance’’ in an effort to define learning as a continuous and integrative process. In his opinion, he regarded the physical behavior of learners as the consequence of life experience and that certain reaction that will be exhibited in a learning environment will be as a result of stimuli provided in the classroom environment. Driscol seems to bear the opinion that learners will respond to the stimulus provided by their trainer by associating it to a particular behavior in their environment. For instance, a student who is punished after fighting will think about this punishment any time that they are about to fight. Consequently, they will only avoid punishment by avoiding fights and at the end they will drop this behavior. The idea of this author borrows a lot from the concept of behavior reinforcement that Skinner referred to as the core of the learning process. A keen look at the idea of Driscol, it is possible to conclude that behaviorism is still a superior method of training in psychology training. Doctor Green, a researcher at Wayne State University, regards behaviorism as a critical tool in the design of teaching programs in many schools (Driscol, Pp.3-9). He recognizes the essence of behavior reinforcement in the learning environment by expressing the superiority of behaviorism principles in modeling effective course for modern classrooms. He points out the need for weighting assignments, tests and practical to reflect the degree of efforts that a teacher intends to generate from students. For instance, if a student is provided with tough exams, they will chip in more energy and hence prepare them for the final exams in a better. To reinforce learners, Green suggests that learners follow up programs be established especially in projects to ensure that they get their teachers’ reaction on the progress. For instance, a student who provides a positive feedback for his progress and receives a “congratulations” remark is likely to develop and retain their working skill, which contributes to skill enhancement. If the idea of this philosopher is something to go by, it would be true to say that behaviorist principles are still relevant in the contemporary classroom. Many philosophers have maintained their support for behaviorism as a modest approach of classroom teaching in the 21st century. Sutton (p. 1) described the modern inclination of education to technological instructional training which in his opinion the new trend in the world wide educational programs. The inculcation of computer software and simulation training in modern schools has provided a new approach that to the teaching that will demand more behavioristic training. In the olden past, the learners were stimulated by using artistic graphics such as drawing and images to enhance their understanding . For instance, a teacher would prepare three images to represent the three stages of milk processing in the industries. These images form conditioned stimulus that students will associate with the stages of milk processing, and hence learn to memorize the topic. In Modern learning environment, computer graphics are widely used both in tests and teaching programs to help students comprehend their lessons in a more efficient manner. According to Sutton (p 2), the introduction of technology based learning is the new form of application of behaviorism principles in the classroom. However, there has risen a great controversy between supporters of constructivism and those of behaviorism in their evaluation as to which method is superior in classroom environment especially in the 21st century. William (p. 5), a strong supporter of constructivism, suggested that constructivism is well versed in introducing technology in contemporary schools, which is the path that every institution is headed. Constructivism supports a learning environment that facilitates the learning process by presenting the students with practical experience in the believe that knowledge and skill is best gained by doing. This means that as students partake in software simulations and practical projects, they will learn their mistakes and from this they will acquire troubleshooting and problem solving skills. By proposing this idea, William reflects on the idea of Piaget (p. 32), a 20th century philosopher, who observed the development of human beings from infancy to adult and concluded that each human being has the ability to learn, based the experiences they encounter in their lives. In essence, the constructivist’s idea is that learners be exposed to more practical experience to enhance their cognitive capacity in the learning process. Finally, most philosophers have reached a concession that neither constructivists nor behaviorism can satisfy the learning process in the modern education system. Keengwe (p. 13), for instance recognized the use of a blended approach as the solution to the weaknesses that exist within both schools of educational philosophy. For instance, Hannifin (p. 20) had pointed out that constructivists has a major weakness in that students that have a weak performance capacity might end suffering from “learned helplessness” if they experience difficulties in solving the problems that they experience in the learning process. This condition will impose them to an inferiority complex which in turn will negatively impact on their academic performance. On the other hand, behaviorism is criticized as a process that is more physical rather than a state of mind and hence lessons learnt through this approach are volatile and may not stand the test of time. Consequently, Keengwe (P. 23) feels the two approaches of classroom training are complementary and can be integrated to optimize learning especially in a technology driven education system. One area in which a blended approach has been upheld is in the training of children with learning disabilities such as memory problems. As Steele points out (Para. 10), student with disabilities have a problem with grasping the contents of one subject depending on the nature of their problems and hence a psychological approach need to be used to sharpen their learning skills. In his learning model, he finds the behavioral theory is crucial in the segmentation of learning tasks and in engaging learners in predictable routine lessons. On the other hand, constructivist approach will assist in relating material subjects with real life situations in to help them students develop mental pictures as they focus on key ideas through the lessons. Just like other supporters of integrative learning, Steele (Para. 11) feels that the two methods are still relevant in the modern teaching environment and that discarding any of them would be doing a disservice to the education system in the contemporary learning. From this point of view, behaviorist principles are still relevant in the modern approach of teaching in classrooms. In conclusion, behaviorism is still a favorite and relevant approach for many philosophers in the current education system. The strength of this approach is embedded in its ability to stimulate the learners’ capacity to adapt to routine learning processes that can easily be developed by a conditioned stimulus. The students will are able to respond to a particular situation by associating it with a particular condition that has no direct relationship with the problem. Although most philosophers feel that learning through observation of physical behavior may be quite a temporary lesson, they appreciate that it is the easiest way to influence a student’s situational reaction. On the other hand, constructivist approach has a more permanent effect on the brain processes and is superior in enhancing the learning process through practical experience. The concession that exists so far is that both processes are compatible and complementary and blending them would the most appropriate way to enhance learning in contemporary schools. References Camp, G., & Doolittle, P., 2000. Constructivism: The Career and Technical Education Perspective. Journal of Vocational and Technical Education, 16 (1), 1-15. Driscoll, P., 2000. Psychology of learning for instruction (2nd ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Hannafin, K., 2000. Student-Centered Learning Environments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Keengwe, J., 2009. Technology and student learning: Toward a learner-cantered teaching Model. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education Journal, 17 (1), 11-22. Piaget, J., 1955. The construction of reality in the child. London: Routledge. Shield, G., 2000. A critical appraisal of learning technology using information and Communication Technologies. Journal of Technology Studies, 3(2), 1-42. Steele, M., 2005 Teaching Students With Learning Disabilities: Constructivism Or Behaviorism? Current Issues in Education [On-line], 8(10), 1-55. Sutton, M., 2003. Problem Representation, Understanding, and Learning Transfer Implications for Technology Education. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 40 (4), 1-42. Williams, P. J. 2000. Design: The only methodology of technology? Journal of Technology Education, 11 (2), 1-56. Read More