Behaviorism
Despite widespread criticism, there are many cases in which behaviorist techniques can be effective.
Behaviorism learning theory was developed from Ivan Pavlov’s life work studying classical conditioning, a method of teaching learned behaviors through conditioned stimuli. Pavlov discovered that he could train dogs to respond to previously neutral stimuli (stimuli that don’t naturally elicit a reaction), like a bell or his lab assistant, by repeatedly presenting them to the dogs with an unconditioned (natural, not learned) stimulus like food. Eventually, the dogs would respond to the neutral stimuli in the same way they would to the unconditioned stimulus; in this case, by salivating, since they expect to receive food when they hear the bell or see the lab assistant (McLeod, 2015).
Pavlov’s experiments with classical conditioning were later developed into Behaviorism learning theory by two 20th century psychologists, J.B. Watson and B.F. Skinner. They believed that behavior could only be accounted for by observable and quantifiable indicators, and that the behaviors of humans, like most animals, were dictated by external factors like their experiences and environment, not by internal factors like personal motives or inherited traits (Behaviorism, n.d.). To behaviorists, the point of education is to instill in students a repertoire of behavioral responses to specific stimuli, which is achieved through conditioning desired behaviors through use of positive and negative reinforcement. When the student learns a behavior, they are rewarded, and so will continue to behave desirably.
Behaviorism rejects anything unobservable, such as a student’s previous experience or anything else going on inside their mind, students are treated as “blank slates”.
The effectiveness of behaviorism is certainly limited. Because behaviorism rejects anything unobservable, such as a student’s previous experience or anything else going on inside their mind, students are treated as “blank slates”. It assumes that all students are the same, and only allows for their learning of specific knowledge and behaviors as determined by the teacher. Behaviorist techniques are not an effective method for teaching subjects that require critical thinking skills or that could have multiple or ambiguous answers. There is also the possibility for forgetting the behaviors or learned facts once the external motives are taken away and the behavior is no longer practiced regularly (Skinner, 1950).
Despite its limitations, it is hard to argue that behaviorist teaching techniques are not at all effective. Humans do respond to positive and negative reinforcement; we like to be rewarded when we do well, and want to do better when we miss out on the reward for not doing well. This is especially effective in younger children, whose minds may not yet have developed enough to think about the long-term benefits of learning things but do respond to rewards that are attainable in the moment. Much of elementary school learning is based in this kind of motivation, as can be seen in the grading system or in being asked questions and immediately being told “good job!” or “try again”. Prizes are also an effective external motivator for teaching young children. Thinking back to my own grade school experiences, I was absolutely motivated to learn the material because I liked getting smiley face stickers on my work or on a progress chart, and answering questions correctly in the classroom and being told “good job!” in front of my peers.
Gamification, or applying game-design thinking to non-game applications, is a highly effective teaching technique that is deeply rooted in behaviorism. Using instant feedback and reward systems, gamification provides an engaging learning environment that leads to anticipated desired outcomes (Pandey, 2015). Games are enjoyable for people, so they are likely to want to return to or, at least, spend more time actively engaged with, a learning tool that uses gamification thus increasing its effectiveness.
Our natural tendencies as humans to seek enjoyment and positive reinforcement can be leveraged to design effective teaching strategies.
Though it is easy to criticize behaviorism for being out-dated since we realize that humans are capable of deeper learning and understanding than simply memorizing facts and desired behaviors, and since we understand humans to respond to a multitude of internal motivating factors rather than just external rewards and reinforcements, it is not wise to reject the behaviorist learning theory completely. Our natural tendencies as humans to seek enjoyment and positive reinforcement can be leveraged to design effective teaching strategies, such as gamification or teaching foundational subjects such as spelling or multiplication tables in elementary school.
Theory in Action: Example of Practical Application
I am creating a curriculum on mindfulness and think a behaviorist approach could be useful in teaching proper breathing technique, which is a foundational element of practicing meditation and other mindfulness exercises. As Saul McLeod (2017) explains, “an obvious advantage of behaviorism is its ability to define behavior clearly and to measure changes in behavior”. Breathing and changes to how we breathe are very observable and can be clearly defined and demonstrated, which makes it an appropriate lesson for the clear cut yes/no, right/wrong behaviorist method.
For the lesson, I will demonstrate the “deep, cleansing breath” technique that means sitting or standing with a straight back, keeping the shoulders relaxed, inhaling through the nose, letting the belly expand and deflate, and exhaling audibly through the mouth.
The stimulus will be me saying to “take a deep, cleansing breath”, which will later be used interchangeably with “take a deep breath/breathe deeply” and later with just “breathe”. The response will be to remember to breathe intentionally using the demonstrated technique.
The positive reinforcement will simply be me affirming that their technique is correct by saying so or saying, “good technique/that’s right”. Hopefully the other positive reinforcement will come from how good they find it feels to breathe deeply and intentionally!
The negative reinforcement will also be simple, just a kind and helpful correction on what elements they aren’t doing correctly, like “remember to keep your shoulders down, don’t let them come up on the inhale!” Or “don’t forget to let your belly expand and deflate when you breathe, I know it might feel silly at first but it allows more oxygen into your system”.
Take a deep, cleansing breath.
Considering this as an eLearning curriculum as well where a learner might not be able to practice with an instructor in real-time, I think a possible quiz element could also be helpful. Having true/false and multiple choice questions on the technique, maybe with videos of people breathing correctly and incorrectly as examples for learners to identify as right or wrong could be an effective behaviorist teaching component. In this case, the question would be the stimulus and the learner answering the questions would be the response, and the positive reinforcement would be an indicator that the answer is correct while the negative reinforcement would be an indicator that the response was incorrect and having to repeat the question.
References
Behaviorism. (n.d). In Graduate Student Instructor Teaching &
Resource Center. Berkeley Graduate Division.
http://gsi.berkeley.edu/gsi-guide-contents/learning-theory-
research/behaviorism/McLeod, S. A. (2013). Pavlov’s dogs. Simply Psychology.
www.simplypsychology.org/pavlov.htmlMcLeod, S. A. (2017, Febuary 05). Behaviorist approach. Simply
Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/behaviorism.htmlPandey, A. (2015, July 1). Top 6 Benefits Of Gamification In
eLearning. EI Design. https://www.eidesign.net/top-6-benefits-
of-gamification-in-elearning-2/?
utm_campaign=elearningindustry.com&utm_source=%2F6-killer-
examples-gamification-in-elearning&utm_medium=linkSkinner, B. F. (1950). Are Theories of Learning Necessary?
Psychological Review, 57, 193–216. Classics in the History of
Psychology. http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Skinner/Theories/
