#2 Behavioral and Social Learning Theories

Description 

     Behavioral theories of learning have been developed by Ivan Pavlov and B. F. Skinner. Pavlov studied the idea of classical conditioning in reference to our reflexes and Skinner studied the consequences that come from particular behaviors and how we can shape those behaviors (Slavin, 2018). Social learning theories expanded on behavioral learning theories by studying how we learn and the effects of self-regulation on our learning (Slavin, 2018). 

Analysis 

    Learning can be described as a change an individual goes through or new schema “caused by the environment” (Slavin, 2018, p. 98). It can be formal or informal, an example of formal learning is the learning that happens in school. Informal learning can happen through life experiences, an example could be learning not touching a pan on the stove because one has previously gotten burned by touching a hot pan on the stove. Slavin (2018) explained that children are always learning, and a teacher needs to guide that learning toward what they are teaching. 

    Pavlov studied the effect the sight of meat had on a dog. The dog naturally salivated, next a bell was rung just before the dog was exposed to the meat. Eventually, the dog would salivate at the sound of the bell ringing even when no meat was produced. This was called “classical conditioning” (Slavin, 2018, p.99). The salivation was an “unconditional response”, initially a bell ringing was a “neutral stimulus” (not producing a response), but after the conditioning of the dog, the bell became a “conditional stimulus” (Slavin, 2018, p. 99). It is possible to condition reflexes. 

    Skinner went beyond reflexive behaviors and studied “operant conditioning” that did not have an “unconditioned stimuli (Slavin, 2018, p. 99).” These operant behaviors, reinforcers and punishers, present consequences on one’s environment. Reinforcers encourage behaviors by satisfying our needs (Slavin, 2018). Those needs can be basic or secondary. An example of a basic need is “food, clothing, and security” and secondary needs can be related to acquiring our basic needs, such as money or praise (Slavin, 2018, p. 101). Praise could be considered a positive reinforcer because it would encourage desirable behavior. A negative reinforcer would also encourage a particular behavior by allowing a student to “escape” from an unpleasant task (Slavin, 2018, p. 101). The “Premack Principle” could be described as an “if, then” scenario (Slavin, 2018, p. 102). An example would be, “If or when you finish your schoolwork, then we will go to recess”. It would focus on desirable and less desirable activities and how one would encourage the completion of less desirable activities. Two more types of reinforcers would be intrinsic and extrinsic reinforcers (Slavin, 2018). An example of an intrinsic reinforcer would stem from how a person feels when they had finished a task, and an example of an extrinsic reinforcer would be a reward for having completed a task, both reinforcers could “motivate people to engage in a specific behavior (Slavin, 2018, p. 103).” 

    Punishers discourage unwanted behavior, so if it did not reduce the frequency of the behavior, it would not a considered a punisher (Slavin, 2018). An example would be when a child is sent to the office, they may have wanted to be sent out because they would get one-on-one attention, and/or candy, or could avoid an unwanted task (Slavin, 2018, 105). Scolding of students would be “presentation punishments” and taking away a pleasant consequence is known as “removal punishment. An example of removal punishment would be time out (Slavin, 2018, p. 105). Punishments should be a last resort and could have more adverse effects than was worth it for temporary compliance. For more effective results, students should have been given immediate consequences toward unwanted behaviors so they could have made a connection “between the behavior and consequence” and it would “increase the value of feedback (Slavin, 2018, p. 106).” 

    There are important variables that determine how effective reinforcers would be during operant conditioning. When a teacher has given feedback during a multi-step task, it is known as “shaping” and “extinction” would be when all reinforcers have been withdrawn so the behavior eventually disappears (Slavin, 2018, p. 107). An example would be ignoring unwanted behavior, at first there may have been an “extinction burst” where the student would increase the behavior to try to get a reaction, but the behavior would eventually slow down or stop (Slavin, 2018, p. 107). The key would be to be consistent because as soon as a teacher gives in once, it would show that the behavior would be tolerated. Reinforcers can be on a schedule, meaning the frequency or amount of time increases between reinforcement. A “fixed ratio” would be known for giving reinforcement after a “fixed” number of behaviors. The ratio could be increased, or it could vary and be unpredictable, known as “variable-ratio schedule (Slavin, 2018, p. 108).” A teacher that would want to introduce a new behavior should reinforce the behavior frequently to encourage operant conditioning and gradually release reinforcement as the behavior became common place (Slavin, 2018). A teacher may have wanted to “cue”, give a signal, a behavior to indicate which behavior was desired. An example would have been a verbal or hand signal to bring the class’ attention back for instructions (Slavin, 2018, p. 110). Teachers can express which behaviors were desired or would be reinforced through verbal and nonverbal means, they would need to give feedback so students would have been able to “discriminate” when they were incorrect or correct (Slavin, 2018, p. 110). When a student has learned to transfer a behavior to a different subject or set of conditions, it would be known as “generalization (Slavin, 2018, p. 111). An example to encourage generalization would have been to use everyday objects/manipulatives when teaching, so students would have a concrete example of subject content, such as using real money when teaching budgeting (Slavin, 2018). 

    Social learning theory has stemmed from behavior learning theory. Albert Bandura focused on the effects of cues on behavior and on thinking about behavior. He studied “modeling” and how children imitate other’s behavior or learned through vicarious experience (Slavin, 2018, p. 111). He referred to this “no-trial learning” in four stages from getting one’s attention, to practicing the behavior, then matching the behavior, and finally imitating behavior because of a perceived chance of reinforcement (Slavin, 2018, p. 112). Students could learn behaviors by watching others that had been reinforced or punished, this has been called “vicarious learning (Slavin, 2018, p. 113). A teacher could encourage students to set goals and track their progress, this would be an example of “self-regulation”, this would allow students to judge their own behavior (Slavin, 2018, p. 114). 

    Meichenbaum developed a strategy that would encourage students to be cognizant of their thought processes. This could be done using self-created check lists where students could monitor their progress or break large tasks into smaller tasks. This would lead to “self-reinforcement” because the behavior would lead to changes based on information that was “self-provided (Slavin, 2018, p. 115).” Both behavioral and social learning theories could be used in tandem to help a teacher become more effective. 

Reflection 

    Behavioral and social learning theories have really opened my eyes to becoming a more effective teacher. I have observed and learned from veteran teachers and teacher with excellent classroom management, but now I understand why I have been doing what I have been doing. I am excited to tweak my practices to more effectively encourage my students to exhibit behavior that will contribute to a learning environment conducive to everyone reaching their potential. An example would be cueing, I have used cues and then I have dropped them. There have been classes where this was because students did not need a cue to remember the desired behavior, such as calling students to attention when they had been collaborating. Other classes have continued to be a struggle and seemed to ignore the cue until they decided to pay attention (my first couple of years of teaching). I thought it was an unruly class, but it may have been that I “gave up” using the cue or I did not reinforce it enough. I am more motivated to implement my “newfound” understanding of operant conditioning. 

    Some positive aspects for the concept of behavioral and social learning theories are that there are so many variable or types of strategies to use. I need to remember that I should pay attention to whether the behavior is increasing or decreasing and what behavior am I trying to reinforce. Even sending a student to the “office” may not give the desired result. Some students will use this to avoid an undesired task, get the attention they are seeking, or even increase their credibility among peers. I rarely send anyone out, because they come back in minutes with candy and a smile on their face. I do not view this as deterring an undesirable behavior. I plan to use more praise and immediate feedback to reinforce positive behaviors, instead of candy. I have never felt good about giving candy, but I know it has worked for others. I will try more praise or a token system for “prizes”. As I read the chapter, I had a thought to give a “5-minute chat” with the principal as a reward. I know my principal will support this to encourage positive behaviors. This, of course, will be something to work towards for the students.         One negative aspect of behavioral and social learning theories is that measured results tend to only be ones that can be observed. It would be interesting to find a way to measure cognitive results too. It is one thing to get students to “comply” with desired behaviors and another to be able to measure cognitive behaviors. I wonder how we could measure student motivation and thinking? 

    In the reading, it was suggested to get students to monitor their own progress by creating checklists. I want to implement this next school year, because I feel it will encourage students to think about what steps they need to take to complete a task. I plan to model this first and allow my students to practice and build up to creating their own checklists. When students monitor their own progress and reflect on their learning/behaviors they begin to self-regulate and increase “self-efficacy (Slavin, 2018, p. 116).” This week’s reading increased and confirmed my understanding of using reinforcers to improve student behavior to create a positive learning environment and an academically challenging environment. References Slavin, R. E. (2018). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice (12th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.