Behaviourism

To most young teens today, a person of inspiration maybe the cliché; mom, dad, Martin Luther King Jr. or even the common, Bob Marley. When given the question, why?, general answers are provided. To fully grasp the concept of having an inspiration, one must understand first the definition of the word, “inspire.” According to Webster’s Dictionary, the words “inspire” is defined as; “(v.) to fill with an animating quickening, or exalting influence.” One person who has made an impact on my life, and has been an inspiration to me, would be my brother.

Born February 23, 1989, Justin was the oldest out of three children. Nine short years after his birth, Justin passed away on the day of July 11, 1998. Being the youngest, all I ever wanted was to be around him. I never knew that in those short four years, I would learn so much. Faith has always been a very important aspect in my family, and Justin had a faith not common to most nine-year olds. He took the fundamentals that we were raised on and expanded his own knowledge. His relationship with God inspired me to begin my faith journey. Justin made a tremendous impact on my faith life, that I will always be thankful for and I still continue to grow with God and Justin alongside.

Another way that Justin made an impact on my life was that he taught me the virtue of patience. According to my parents, Justin’s most difficult class was mathematics. He had developed a passionate disliking for it but, had enough patience to persevere every school year. His patience impacted me in every way possible. I am quite the perfectionist and it takes a couple of times before I achieve my goal. It can become very aggravating and tiring when it is not accomplished the first time around. Justin has become an example for me, I aspire to posses as much patience as he embodied.

One last way my brother has impacted my life was through his selflessness. Justin always put others before himself. He had such an endless love for his family and his friends. He treated me and my sister as if we were his own daughters. His selflessness has impacted my life as an inspiration. I aspire to become a selfless person like he was. Community service is a huge part of my life. I love giving back to the community as much as I can. Selflessness is another virtue that isn’t easy to own. It takes a lot of patience to become selfless, and Justin taught me both.

Justin was not perfect. In reality, he was just a child. But even the smallest of children can be the ones who inspire the world. Justin definitely impacted my life by becoming a role model to me. He handled every situation thrown at him mature manner exceeding his own age. I aspire to be just like him, to posses his qualities and virtues. His legacy is one that will always inspire me, everyday.

Inquisitive and self-directed learning is a natural behavior for young children. They marvel at each new discovery and strive to understand the meaning behind every question in their world. However, older children seem to be resistant to learning unless directed. By teachers or parents with various forms of external recognition (Deci and Ryan, 1981). Their enthusiasm and inner desire for understanding has diminished. Learning, to older children has become directly connected to demands, controls, and rewards.

In order to understand why this attitude toward learning develops. The concept of motivation in education must be defined and examined in a theoretical sense. Motivation is an essential condition of learning (Ray, 1992, p.3). A motivating condition may be defined as an emotion, desire, physiological need. Or similar impulse that acts as an incitement to action.

Ray (1992) comments that motivation in education is concerned with students’ motivation to learn (p.3). With the understanding of these defined concepts in hand, we can begin to examine the reasons behind school age children losing their enthusiasm for learning. In order to comprehend the reason for the undermining of this intrinsic behavior, we must acknowledge the basic theories of motivation from an eclectic standpoint. By embracing the concepts of learning from both a behaviorist and cognitive point of view, a teacher can tailor the use of reinforcement in the classroom to commit the students to achieving academic excellence with enthusiasm and devotion.

Findings

Humanistic behavior and learning techniques are viewed from many different positions of psychological theories (Ramirez, 1983). In order for a teacher to effectively apply these psychological principles in their classroom, they must become knowledgeable in the various conflicting theories. Looking at the theoretical aspect of motivation to learn provides background information about the basic nature of different learning processes (Ericksen, 1974). The locus of control in motivation is the subject area where separate theoretical views come into play. People have either an internal locus of control, an external locus of control, or are simply amotivated.

Intrinsic motivation is a state where the relevance for the learner of the content of the material is the main reason for learning. Extrinsic motivation for learning is a state where the reasons for the learning effort have nothing to do with the content of the learning material. A good learning performance serves only as a means for achieving some desired end result. (Marton, 1982, p.8)

Amotivated people tend to be passive and non-responsive. They seem to believe that they cannot have a meaningful impact on their environment, so they tend not to behave. They frequently feel helpless and are easily upset. Their learning is slow and seems to be painful (Deci and Ryan, 1981, p.2)

The question of how people learn divides learning theorists into one of three major groups: behavioral [classical and operant conditioning], cognitive [insight, latent and observational learning], and eclectic [combinations of behavioral and cognitive theories] (Banks and Thompson, 1995, p.226). Behaviorism, in a contemporary sense, does not rely on solely stimulus/response motives as does classical conditioning. B.F. Skinner developed the concept of behaviorism that focuses on reinforcement as the only factor necessary to explain motivation. This division of behaviorism is classified as operant conditioning (Kolesnik, 1978).

Operant conditioning is more useful in explaining our voluntary behavior and is considerably more relevant to the problems of motivation (Kolesnik, 1978, p.77). Kolesnik comments that the basic tenet of operant conditioning is that behavior is shaped by its end result. The concept of consequences implies some system of reward or punishment, some form of pleasure or pain, some type of positive or negative reinforcement. This whole concept of operant conditioning supports the theoretical view of extrinsic motivation.

Cognitive theories, on the other hand, emphasize the point that our behavior is not determined by discriminative or reinforcing stimuli in and of themselves but by our perceptions or interpretations of those stimuli (Kolesnik, 1978, p.109). This implies that in a classroom situation, learning depends not only on external stimuli such as the explanations, demands, and expectations of teachers but more so on what those stimuli mean to us.

Kolesnik states that cognitive psychology places a greater stress on the process of learning than it does on the outcomes and tends to rely more heavily on intrinsic rather than extrinsic forms of motivation. William Glasser played an essential role in intrinsic motivation of learning through the development of the control theory. The control theory emphasizes the idea that everything people think, do, and feel is generated by what happens inside of them (Banks and Thompson, 1995).

Ideally, motivation should be intrinsic. Students should want to study the subject for its own sake or for the sense of accomplishment in learning something new. Since many students are not intrinsically motivated, however, extrinsic rewards can sometimes offer a first step toward increased motivation (Practitioner, 1987, p.3).

Human beings experience all three of these motivational states at one time or another. Teachers must acknowledge the experiences of these motivational sets in the classroom and implement individualized instruction in order for students to encounter learning at its highest quality. In order to tailor our instructional practices toward developing intrinsically motivated students in the classroom, the use of extrinsic rewards must be carefully analyzed and measured.

Tailoring Extrinsic Reinforcement

As stated before, if extrinsic reinforcement is used incorrectly, the students’ enthusiasm and inner desire to learn can be incapacitated. This undermining occurs because extrinsic rewards create a dependency between the behavior and the reward. The answer to this problem lies in the nature of rewards and communications which they contend have either one of two aspects: controlling or informational (Deci and Ryan, 1981, p.8).

Deci and Ryan define that the function of the controlling aspect is to bring about a certain behavioral result that is desired by the one who is giving the reward. The function of the informational aspect is to provide information to the recipient that is relevant to their performance. Even though every reward contains these two aspects, the conveyance of the reward determines its effects on intrinsic motivation.

Applications

In an experiment where two groups of subjects were paid prior to completing a task. One group was paid controllingly and the other was paid informationally. The group of subjects that were paid informationally were more intrinsically motivated to complete the task (Enzle, Ross, Rosenfield, Folger, and Adelman, 1980). This experiment supports the fact that informational reinforcement enhances intrinsic motivation.

This idea can easily be applied to the classroom with use of both tangible and verbal rewards. The important point from the studies mentioned is that the effect of rewards and communications on intrinsic motivation depends on whether they are interpreted by the recipients as being primarily informational or primarily controlling (Deci and Ryan, 1981, p.10). This application is very important in schools because rewards and communications are essential parts of educational systems (Deci and Ryan, 1981).

Concluding Recommendations

The eclectic view of the concept of motivation to learn must then be acknowledged because even though it is ideal to be intrinsically motivated, to discard implementation of extrinsic forms of motivation or avoid the fact that some students will be amotivated at times would not be realistic.

After reviewing behavioral and cognitive theories of learning, it appears to be obvious that the most effective measure to be taken to motivate students to learn would be to implement the best parts of each of the mentioned theoretical concepts (Banks and Thompson, 1995). Behaviorist make a strong argument for limiting the study of learning to observable behavior that can be counted and analyzed for its meaning. Observable behavior is easy to validate and changes are recognizable (Banks and Thompson, 1995, p.273).

The Social Learning Theory of Bandura emphasises the importance of observing. And modelling the behaviours, attitudes and emotional reactions of others. The Social Learning Theory explains. Human behaviour in terms of continuous reciprocal interaction between cognitive. Behavioural, an environmental influences, suggesting that behaviour can be learned.

At the cognitive level through observing other people’s actions. (Blackburn, 1993). This suggests that people are capable of imagining themselves in similar situations. And of incurring similar outcomes. Once the behaviour is learned it may be reinforced or punished by the consequences it generates. Bandura subscribed to several of the essential concepts of the Operant Conditioning Theory: reinforcement, punishment, and motivation. (Ewen, 1980) Each of these concepts can be used to explain Paul’s initial and prolonged criminal activities.

Based on Social Learning Theory, criminal behaviour is maintained through a complex schedule of reinforcement and punishment throughout the life of the individual. The reinforcement for criminal behaviour comes from both internal and external sources. Reinforcement can be in the form of tangible rewards stemming from the criminal activity itself such as an outlay of money, or from a social perspective like an increase in peer status. (Blackburn, 1993; Hollin, 1989)

Due to Paul’s dysfunctional childhood and strong negative influences in his life he found himself tempted by criminal activities in his early teens. He was sent to a boy’s home when he was fourteen for stealing, and has been in and out of juvenile and adult institutions ever since. In relation to the Social Learning Theory, Paul was motivated by direct external reinforcement, by the tangible and social status rewards. Due to his upbringing and lack of parental discipline these Paul thought these rewards easily outweighed the consequences of this criminal actions.

The time Paul served in juvenile institutions did not discourage him from criminal activities, instead it had the opposite effect. Contact with other people who have favourable criminal antics and perceptions leads to an individual learning similar modes of action. (Hollin, 1989) The theory does not indicate that these people are necessarily associated with crime or criminal activities; they only have to express favourable attitudes towards crime. (Hollin, 1989) However, while Paul was in juvenile institutions he did mix with other criminals which did strengthen the likelihood of him continuing in his criminal behaviour.

Bandura also believed that there was another aspect to motivation, he called it self-reinforcement. (Ewen, 1980) Self-reinforcement refers to ones’ sense of pride, or as meeting of standards in ones’ own behaviour. (Ewen, 1980) Paul’s belief that he was a criminal was reinforced while in these juvenile institutions. He was happy to be a part of this group of criminals and he continued to act criminally to some degree in order to remain a part of the group and as to maintain a sense of pride and social identity.

A study in which young children were shown adults interacting with a character called “Bobo Doll” was conducted in order to prove that observation is a primary form of learning. In one film, the adults attacked Bobo, and in another they were friendly to it. One group of children were shown one film another group shown the other.

The adults attacked Bobo in a distinctive manner, they used a hammer as a weapon in some instances and in others threw the doll in the air and shouted “Pow, Boom!”. As a result of this violent version of the film, the researchers claimed that if the children repeated such behaviour, they learnt it rather than it being acted out spontaneously.

Later in 1965, Bandura carried out the same experiment, but showed the adults who behaved aggressively either being punished or rewarded for their actions. Those children, who had seen the adults rewarded, and those who had seen the adult neither rewarded nor punished, behaved more aggressively than those who had seen the adults receive a form of punishment.

This suggests that the children who had seen the adults being punished simply could not remember how the adults had behaved. However, when Bandura rewarded all of the children for imitating the behaviour of the adults, this was shown not to be the case. Thus, all three groups of children had comparable levels of observational learning, but those who had seen the adults punished did not emulate the behaviour.

The prevalent factor that is stressed in Bandura’s theory is that observation is the process of attention. He states that the individual notices something in the environment (retention), the individual remembers what was noticed (reproduction), the individual produces an action that is a copy of what was noticed (motivation) and the environment delivers a consequence that changes the probability the behaviour will be emitted again (reinforcement and punishment).

Therefore, Paul’s learned criminal characteristics were reinforced by observing his father’s and brother’s criminal activities and the constant repetition of this behaviour enabled Paul to scaffold long lasting criminal tendencies. Criminality is a function of individual socialisation, how individuals have been influenced by their experiences or relationships with family, peer groups, teachers, authority figures and other agents of socialisation. Therefore, Paul’s immediate family had a substantial impact on his behaviour. Paul came from a dysfunctional family environment. He did not have a male authority figure in his father and his father was often absent from the family home, serving his many prison sentences.

Moreover, when his father was home he drank heavily and was regularly violent towards his wife and the children. Paul and his siblings grew up in a family where discipline was nonexistent or grossly excessive and did not have a chance to learn what behaviour was tolerable and what was completely inappropriate. Paul learnt criminal characteristics such as violent and aggressive behaviour through observing his father and how this behaviour was reinforced and repeated by his older brothers.

Paul’s mother had limited intellectual and social resources which resulted in a poor education for her children, which later on had a substantial effect on their employment chances. Paul was born into a life of poverty, he grew up in a lower class neighbourhood with a criminal subculture or criminal way of life was common. Paul was exposed to criminal subcultures where criminal behaviour was merely a social deviance and was influenced by this was of living.

There are two main issues which Paul uses to justify his initial actions. Paul justifies his actions through higher principles; believing that stealing from a commercial factory is not wrong because they are insured. He also believes that he was also subject to legalities which increased his sentence. If he committed the same crime on a private home, instead of a commercial factory, he would have received a shorter sentence. The other is being a victim of peer pressure or social psychology.

Social psychology involves the behaviour of an individual when they are within a group. One such relationship is the Conformity Effect which explains that behaviour is dictated by social bonds; Paul priding himself that he is not a ‘dog’ (he does not tell on others). Also, there is a tendency for an individual to adopt group norms even if they contradict their own values. Paul stated that he had no intention of committing the act prior to going to the local pub, but was subject to peer pressure or ‘conformity’ when he ran into old prison friends. (Study Asch, 1995)

However, there is some hope for Paul, it is possible to coach a person using the Social Learning Theory to eliminate or reduce certain behaviours. The process is lengthy and the success rate is dependant on factors that differentiate from person to person. When using the Social Learning Model the subject must progress through the modelling process. Firstly, Attention through the observation of positive behaviours and responses that interest the individual and captures their undivided attention.

Secondly, Retention – Paul must be able to remember, or store the new information. Thirdly, Reproduction – through modelling the desired behaviour and coaching, Paul must be able to demonstrate the new skill or behaviour. The next step is Motivation – Paul must have a motivating incentive for learning or changing his behaviour; and then finally Self-regulation – which involves changing the unwanted behaviour, Paul must self observe and judge his own behaviour. (Boeree, 2003) Using this theory as a comparative model it is quite possible to coach Paul to reduce or eliminate his criminal urges, he does feel ashamed of himself for committing criminal acts and the presence of his family may be the paramount underlying motivation.

Bandura’s Social Learning Theory examines the way a person behaves is dependant on how the personal, behavioural, observational and environmental factors interact and how they affect the learning process. Paul’s characteristics have been primarily instigated through observation of his family, his peers and his social environments.

Behaviourist Theory (10 marks) First of all, behaviourists are psychologists that believe that behaviours are learnt instead of them being natural. Behaviourist theory believes that people learn to be phobic rather than are born phobic. Reason being, many people link their fear of an object or situation to something bad they have experienced. For instance, if someone is scared of needles, it may have been because they had a bad experience with it as a child, thus causing a phobia. This I known as classical conditioning – learning by association; learn to associate a certain response with a certain stimulus.

However, even behaviourists do take into account that some behaviour are not learnt, but are instinctive instead. This is called unconditioned response. This contains of instinctive responses such as sexual arousal and anxiety. Unconditioned responses are triggered by unconditioned stimulus. They can be objects or events that naturally cause the reaction such as stimulating genitals might cause arousal or a threat may cause us to be anxious. Yet, sometimes these responses happen in the presence of a neutral stimulus. Neutral stimuli don’t cause a reaction.

However we assume it does when we experience something good or bad. For example if a person ate chips and got sick -vomited, they may assume chips cause a bad reaction every single time. This is known as classical conditioning. Therefore each of the neutral stimuli is then described as a conditioned stimulus because they trigger a learnt response. A reaction to a conditioned stimulus is called a conditioned response. Also operant conditioning is a term used by the behaviourist to describe learning by consequences. If the consequences of an action are worthwhile we learn to do them again.

Yet if the consequences are not good, we are likely not to do it again. Atypical behaviours are learnt in the same manner as typical behaviours. Atypical behaviours are just more uncommon cases of classical conditioning. One of the criticisms of this theory is that it ignores the mind and the thinking behind it. For example if we two people got robbed at night, one is likely to think of it as one time incident and forget about it- rational. Whereas the other will think it will happen many times again – irrational. Thus causes to develop a phobia of dark. Different people have different outlook to the event.

Establishing Ground Rules and Promoting Appropriate Behaviour When it comes to dealing with a new group of students, the first thing that one needs to keep in mind is that every student, as an independent individual, is unique and prone to acting upon and analysing certain situations in diverse ways. In order to come to a mutual understanding, certain arrangements on anticipated conduct within the classroom have to be made and maintained. According to Atherton (2011), these arrangements or ground rules are “the minimum necessary conditions for getting learning work done in the class”.

So essentially, the ground rules are a pact concluded between the learners and the teacher; a pact that provides a greater understanding of the expectations as well as the needs of both the teacher and the learners relating to positive learning environment. There are various ways or approaches in which ground rules can be constructed. The concept of setting out rules is closely connected to the idea of leadership – “a process of influencing the activities of… a group of individuals in an effort towards goal achievement in given situations” (Bhatti et al, 2012).

Consequently the approaches of ground rule establishment can be compared to three leadership styles, determined by Lewin, Lippit and White in their article Patterns of Aggressive Behaviour in Experimentally Created Social Climates (1939): a) authoritarian type, when the leader is making decisions independently with almost no contribution from the rest of the group, b) delegative or Laissez-Faire type, when the decision making is in the hands of group members, and c) democratic type, when the leader is allowing and encouraging the contribution from the members of the group.

Every leadership style mentioned above could be implemented in the formation of ground rules in the classroom, the question is, however, which one of these would prove to be the most effective? On one hand, it can be debated that authoritarian approach could be beneficial – a set of clear, predetermined rules, provided by the teacher could give a good insight into the outcomes and certain regulations, that the learners would be expected to comply with. On the other hand though, this approach by its nature is not earner inclusive, which could result in the learners’ reluctance to engage because of the dictatorial essence of the authoritarian approach. One can argue, that the delegative approach could be impactful, when working out ground rules, because the learners would be free to make independent decisions and set out their own standards. However, every educational establishment has a scheme of set policies and requirements that one has to hold by, which would mean that these policies would have to be included in the making of ground rules.

Yet the learners might not be aware of these and therefore won’t necessarily include those in their rule structure. Consequently, the Laissez-Faire approach might not be the right option. Common sense dictates that the democratic approach could be the best path to take. That way the formation of ground rules can be seen as a collaborative decision between the teacher and the learners. The teacher will be in a position to identify and establish particular rules that need to be in place, such as certain regulations, i. e.

Health & Safety issues, or their expectations towards the learners, whereas the learners, in turn, will be able to address their preferences and requirements. This combined decision making can be achieved through group discussion or ice breaker activities, where different ideas can be proposed and afterwards either accepted or discarded. It can be reasoned that the advantage of this approach is the fact that the learners will be given a voice in decision making, therefore they will be more likely to respect and adhere to the set out rules.

With an eye on creating a healthy learning environment, the established ground rules need to promote and encourage appropriate and positive behaviour from both the learners and the teacher, both in and out of the classroom. In order to preserve this positive setting the teacher should place the emphasis on attaining an organic and well-handled atmosphere within the classroom, by encouraging creativity and enthusiasm in learners, recognising and praising success, flexibility in learning styles and approaches, as well as modelling of good and respectful behaviour, preventing any sorts of inappropriate conduct.

In return, the learners should respect and appreciate the ground rules, be aware of their fellow learners and be able to consider and accept their needs, as well as to develop the sense of self discipline and responsibility. REFERENCES • Atherton, J. S. (2011) Learning and Teaching; Ground Rules for the class [Online] Available from: http://www. learningandteaching. info/teaching/ground_rules. htm • Bhatti, N. , Maitlo, G. M. Shaikh, N. , Hashmi, M. A. , Shaikh, F. M. (2012) The Impact of Autocratic and Democratic Leadership Style on Job Satisfaction, International Business Research [e-journal], 5(2). Available from: http://ccsenet. org/journal/index. php/ibr/article/view/14599 • Lewin, K. , Lippitt, R. , White, R. K. (1939) Patterns of Aggressive Behaviour in Experimentally Created Social Climates, The Journal of Social Psychology, 10(2), p. 269-299