Learning, Knowledge and Human Development MOOC’s Updates
Essential Update #1. Response to behaviorism: the teacher's role and questioning its flexibility
The role of the teacher in the behaviorist scheme is to take the lead in presenting positive and negative stimuli to students in order to establish their learning process (Skinner, 1986). Teachers are the promoters of established ''good'' behavior and refer to punishments and rewards to have students stick to this. I put good in air quotes since there are many interpretations of what is good behavior depending on societal values. The environment and society determine what students learn from a young age is acceptable within that learning community. Therefore, the classroom is not only a space for learning factual and analytical knowledge but also shapes a person as a social citizen. This is a positive aspect of schooling environments as students learn much more than just maths and reading, but it has been and can be difficult to establish what needs to be taught to be right and wrong. Especially in an environment of globalization where cultures are exchanged and meeting more frequently, sometimes students may be subjected to expectations that are different from their original culture, parents, etc. Thus there needs to be a consideration for the student's background and previous development when assessing their learning process. Here the nature vs. nurture argument also leaks in, I believe: how can we measure what part of a student's behavior is inherited and which is purely environmental? This I think fits with one of the criticisms of behaviorism: it can be too narrow and repetitive. I am curious to see how the differences in behavior children that are taught from a young age before school would be taken into consideration in traditional behaviorist thought.
A response to this is my experience working in schools in a city versus being in a school ~15 years ago and in a small town. Where I work there is a program named the ''Peaceful School'', applied by different schools in the area. It is focused on accepting students' differences while teaching correct behaviors like solving conflicts, respecting each other, etc. It might seem like a necessity to some, but I did not know such a program in elementary, middle, or high school. The establishment of such ideas and the implementation in school every day- the teachers take one moment in the week to do an activity focused on the ideas of the program- I think reflects what I mentioned earlier. While respecting the students' different backgrounds, cultures, and consequentially, part of their behaviors, there is still the reinforcement of behavior that is necessary for a positive learning environment for all, through positive stimuli.
This amazing, How the role of a teacher as behaviorists is being discussed
Social citizen is such a powerful thought to how to behave outside the classroom. It seems that the role of the teacher has changed through out history base on what is needed at that time or place.
The Peaceful School model you mention sounds a lot like the Social Emotional Learning (SEL) push we are starting to see now especially after the pandemic.
I read you are a teacher, how do you experience this shift towards more responsibility of ''socializing'' students and preparing them for things other than just academic skills? Or is that more of an elementary school phase?
Interesting, I will look into that. I think it is probably very related to each other.
I love the Peaceful School idea. Much needed civility.
I am curious to see how the differences in behavior children that are taught from a young age before school would be taken into consideration in traditional behaviorist thought.
-- This is a function of social/economic privilege, I fundamentally believe. If certain parents have the opportunity to better prepare their kids at a super-early age before entering school, it demonstrably shows in the classroom. Even in the form of better receptivity to conditioning (they've already had the right stimuli: a violin lesson in evening, math bootcamp in morning). But if the household never had that luxury, is that really the child's fault that they cannot better/faster condition themselves? Or if their innate capacity got stilted (e.g., no broadband access at home)? That is a policy and civics issue, in my opinion.
I totally agree that it is a policy and civics issue. That is why, I think, there should be more consideration for such things as no access to educative sources etc. in early childhood in the context of schooling. I think there is a growth in this, at least I see it in the schools I work, but there is definitely a way to go. The child should receive a fitting mode of learning when they are less receptive to the standard way of teaching. I would say that traditional behaviorist thought is not very receptive to this. Thank you for your response!