Comment: 

With respect to B.F. Skinner, I felt most compelled to comment on what he mentioned about education and it's inability to address the "self management of motivation." As an educator, I agree with him; it has been difficult to teach self management and to get to heart of motivation for scholars because of the very nature of education itself. Schools are inherently socializing mechanisms, and if that is their nature then those who are part of it must learn quickly what is "correct" or "incorrect" when it comes to how we interact with others. Teachers need behaviors that are desirable, and for those who are not conforming, they need ways to have those children confrom; hence operant conditioning. There isn't room to adequatly addres motivation, though it be more desirable in the long term. When there is a room of 30 youth or so and material needs to be delivered and mastered within a short amount of time, operant conditioning is much more enticing. There is a time and place for operant conditioning, I won't say that I'm completely against it, but there is a fine line between "control" and allowing our fellow humans to be human. 

Make an Update: 

I recently took an I.Q. test and will say that in my opinion, these tests are entirely bias. They are meant for certain types of learners, with certain types of privilege to knowledge and understanding that not all learnes have access to. I will acknowledge that with respect to special education, it is necessary to determine whether or not these students have some sort of cognitive definiciency but I'm looking for the research that actually is more of a level playing field that what is out in publication right now. There is an assumption of knowledge and language on I.Q. tests that are only privy to those who have obtained certain status. It shouldn't be used to standardize the masses who do no occupy these spaces.