Philosophy of Workplace Education and Training - Essay Example

Philosophy of Workplace Education and Training Q Option A. Using the readings in the Readings section, others you may wish to include and your own practice, if required, as references, address the argument: Real human learning is limited if the behaviourist approach to education and training is adopted. The Vocational Education and Training (VET), the unified and nationwide system being used in vocational education in Australia today, is characterized as primarily competency-based because the states, in coordination with the different industries, developed key competencies which became the standard foundation of learning and training in vocational education. The fundamentals of the competency concept find basis on what the employer expects of his employee to achieve in the workplace environment and less on the learning process. CBT, is founded on the following theories: it should be able to deliver the competency required by the workplace; the aim of the training program should be the successful acquisition of the required competency rather than the emphasis on the amount of time spent in learning; training qualifications should be the competencies or outcomes gained; the competencies should both be descriptive and flexible; competencies should be demonstrable in the workplace, and; competencies should include generic skills that can be used in all other conditions (Keating 1998). In this respect, CBT and therefore VET largely employs the behaviorist approach in education and training, and therefore is a limited kind of learning as compared to learning where cognitive processes are engaged during learning. There are several ways by which education, not only in Australia but in the entire civilized world, is approached. A school system may opt to implement education in any of the following manner: Liberal; Progressive; Humanist; Radical, and; Behaviorist. The Liberal approach or philosophy simply follows the principle of learning for learning’s sake and this is usually illustrated by adult education which is non-credit, non-vocational and open to everyone. The primary concern in this approach is the pursuit of knowledge. The Progressive philosophy, on the other hand, subscribes to the idea that learning is a continuous and life-long process rather than a preparatory phase to ensure employment. The important thing in this approach is the past experience compared and applied to the present as a practical means of learning. The Humanistic or Psychotherapy approach originated in the United States and was initiated by the emergence of psychotherapy in the US in the 1960s. Psychotherapy techniques were brought into the classrooms and the thrust and focus of education became the individual and his growth and the realization of his potential while in the Radical approach, it is the educator who takes a pivotal role as he or she works with people in such a manner as to make them more aware of their social, political and economic environment. The purpose of heightening their environmental awareness is to help them develop skills that will give them the ability to deal with these external conditions. And then there’s the Behaviorist or Mechanistic approach, which is the main consideration in this paper. This approach was a result of the advent of the modern industrial age in the US. The behaviorist approach ruled education and learning programs before the emergence of the cognitive revolution some forty years ago. This approach uses the stimuli-response approach where the ultimate proof that a student has learned the lessons given him is that he or she has manifested behavior, that according to a certain given standard or gauge, is competent. Competence or behavior in accordance to a standard as can be observed physically is the be-all and end-all of the behaviorist approach. For example, if a student is to be taught a complex process, the behaviorist approach initially breaks up the complex process into components and has each component introduce and learned by them. Thereafter, the students are taught how these components are assembled back to the original whole. The emphasis therefore is on synthesis rather than on analysis. If the students then learned all these steps, then they are considered competent. This competence is of course, measured against a previously set standard of key competence developed as part of the curriculum (Royer 2005 120). The most popular psychologists who focused their studies on behaviorism were Watson, Pavlov and Skinner. Ivan Pavlov, for example, who was a Russian psychologist, studied classical conditioning by observing salivating dogs. Observing that dogs salivate when food is presented and also is about to be presented. He thereafter called food an unconditioned stimulus which can draw out an unconditioned response from the dog, viz., salivating. Using a bell and ringing and ringing it and then immediately presenting the food several times, the dog eventually start to salivate even during the time the bell is rang. The ringing of the bell which he called conditioned response therefore acquired the ability to draw out a conditioned response from the dog. This experiment finds applicability in the fact that learned emotional actions and learned reactions are pivotal in the education process (Bentham 2002 p 24). A spin-off from Pavlov’s experiment is the main principle in behaviorism crafted by Skinner which states that “a response will become a habit as a consequence of the number of times it is paired or associated with a given stimulus.” What is of utmost importance here is the deliberate and constant pairing of a certain stimulus to a certain response done over and over again to ensure proficiency in a certain type of motor skill. It was Watson who made a very apt description of the behaviorist’s goal by stating that “it is the business of behaviorist psychology to predict and control human activity” (Vickers 2008 p 163). In the behaviorist approach, the internal processes of the mind do not matter so long as the individual manifested behavior consistent with the standard of competence and the mind is discounted as an element in the performance. However, research made in the 1970s showed that the behaviorist approach is good only for short-terms and that people who acquired learning under the methods above described viz., constant and extensive exposure to the same stimuli 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 Behavioral Training 10 Decision Training 0 Early in Training Later in Training Fig. 1 Motor Learning Research Source: Vickers 2007 p 163 paired with the same response tend to forget what they learned, the motor skills acquired are lost especially when these same individuals are exposed to entirely new conditions and situations (Source: Vickers 2007 p 163). In Fig. 1, Behavioral Training is presented by the blue dash line while Decision Training, which is training which takes into consideration cognitive processes, by the red solid line. This figure represents what is called the paradox in motor learning research which refers to the seeming illogicality of the relative progress of persons taught using the behaviorist approach during the early part and the latter part of the training. Also presented for comparative purposes is the relative progress of individuals taught using the newer method of decision training. As can be seen from the figure the individuals trained using the behaviorist approach showed a higher measure of progress in the early stage as compared to the progress of individuals taught using the decision training approach. However, this development makes an unexpected deviation during the later part of the training. Contrary to normal expectations and experiences that people will improve their craft and knowledge of things as the passing of time naturally hones them, the individuals with the behaviorist training background seem to suddenly lose their steam and their knowledge previously learned begins to falter as time goes by. On the other hand, those taught using the decision technique continue to progress and improve their learning as time passes. The implication of the Behaviorist Training approach therefore is that a person who is taught a certain craft mechanically by constant and extensive exposure to the same stimuli until he or she manifests the desired behavior without engaging his or her mind in the process cannot retain the learning for long while those whose learning and education engaged the mental and cognitive processes not only retain such knowledge in the long-term but continue to progress in their performance as time goes by. Perhaps the rationale for this is the principle that learning through cognitive processes employs understanding whereas the behaviorist simply negates the mental in learning. The reason why understanding results in long-term learning is the principle that humans construct knowledge (Royer 2005 p 121). This simply means that a human being does not simply take in knowledge and retain it in his brain but his retention of that knowledge is subject to his past collective knowledge and that any new knowledge are processed in the mind, compared with the old knowledge and filed mentally under that person’s relative perspective and understanding of that knowledge. Learning through mere behaviorist approach which stresses only mechanical learning without engaging the mind implies that the law of the construction of knowledge does not apply and although the individual has acquired knowledge of it through the stimuli-response method, the same knowledge has not gone through the process of construction and understanding and the mind has not settled its role and significance vis-à-vis his existing mental library of knowledge. And because this learning has not been well examined, its place in the mental hierarchy is superficial which may easily slip away from the mind. The basis of this theory is Piaget’s development of a constructive theory of cognitive functioning and development between 1920 and 1980 (Royer 2005 p 121). On the basis of the findings of the above-mentioned research called the paradox in motor learning research, it would seem that the behaviorist approach in education will not promote a complete and genuine learning and education as evidently, any knowledge gained from such method is merely short-term and superficial. This approach therefore will preclude genuine and long-term learning. This same view was held by Colins who even back in 1991 advocated a resistance against the adoption and implementation of the largely behaviorist CBT in the vocational education system of the country. He thus then referred to it as a “narrow technicist approach to education which defines knowledge in the light of bureaucratic and corporate needs; such strategies resulting in ‘technocratic formulation and reductionistic competence-statements, have served to de-skill the educator’s role and marginalize the vocational commitment of professionals” (qtd. Hodkinson & Issitt 1995 p 46). Collins was also concerned that the behaviorist system like the CBT will relegate the educators to mere automatons being used to implement the system under the guidance of the competency standards of the CBT bereft of real participation as educators in the classroom. Others attacked it as a form of social control and Newman called it as “a discourse of mediocrity, conformity and control.” He called it mediocre because the word ‘competence’ can already be reached upon satisfaction of the minimum requirements of the work, just above the level of incompetence; conformity because trainees are compelled to accept these standards of competencies set up by the authorities to pass the course, and; control because the uniformity of implementation of these standards of competencies denies the training institutions’ freedom to decide and implement the level of competence applicable in each case (Newman 1994). The behaviorist approach to learning and education being implemented in Australia today through CBT and VET is surprising considering that the behaviorist approach has long been relegated to the dustbin when the cognitive approach model of learning emerged some forty years ago. However, globalisation, free trade and the stiff competition offered by the emerging economies like India and China have forced the government against the wall and thus was born CBT. However, it is also important that the government realizes that whatever gains the labour force has made through the implementation of an evidently behaviorist approach is short-term as real and long-lasting learning is not possible through the use of this learning approach alone. A compromise must be developed which will allow a homogenizing factor like CBT in place in the learning system but also makes use of some cognitive model of learning alongside it. References Bentham, Susan 2002, “Psychology and Education,” Routledge. Hodkinson, Phil & Issitt, Mary 1995, “The Challenge of Competence: Professionalism Through Vocational Education and Training,” Continuum International Publishing Group. Keating, Jack 1998, ‘Australian Training Reform: Implications for Schools,’ Curriculum Corporation (Australia) Published by Curriculum Corporation, p 29 Newman, M. 1994, Competent forms of control, in Defining the Enemy: Adult Education in Social Action, Stewart Victor Publishing, Sydney, pp. 116-124. Royer, James M 2005, “The Cognitive Revolution in Educational Psychology,” IAP. Vickers, Joan N. 2007, “Perception, Cognition, and Decision Training: The Quiet Eye in Action,” Human Kinetics, 2007 Read More