Note: this post was created as an assignment for the course LDT100x Instructional Design and Technology: Learning Theories You can learn more about this course (and the Micro-Master's program it is a part of) here.
In this series, I will introduce core learning theories, detail their strengths and weaknesses, and discuss their potential applicability in the college or university classroom. I will also provide links throughout if you want to learn more.
How do we learn?
According to behaviorists, we are shaped by our external environment- more specifically, our responses to stimuli. Learning happens based on a system of rewards and punishments that "condition" the learner to ultimately perform behaviors on their own.
A behaviorist approach has fallen somewhat (majorly?) out of favor with educators. It is frequently described as a "rigid," "traditional," "top-down," "too teacher-centered" approach that "highly effective teachers" do not use (Askew et al, 1997; Hassad, 2011). After hearing this, you are probably thinking:
(GIF description: A fashionable man with dark brown hair saying "Ew" and making a disgusted face)
Yes, this perspective is not exactly popular among many professors today (a quick Google search for "behaviorism college classroom" mostly pulls up critiques of this perspective). However, it remains a core element of the education system (even in higher ed). And, dare I say, there might even be some potential benefits to this approach (keep an open mind!).
Let's dive in, shall we?
A (BRIEF!) History of Behaviorism
Imagine this, it's the early 20th century and Sigmund Freud and an overall introspective tone pervades psychology. Many psychologists were disillusioned with trying to study, map, and understand human consciousness (especially when they couldn't replicate their studies) and looking for an alternative.
In the late 1800s in Russia, Ivan Pavlov noticed an interesting behavior in the dogs he was studying: when an attendant that normally fed the dogs entered the room they would produce saliva, even though they were not being fed. He extended this to an experiment where he would ring a bell and feed the dogs.
Pavlov termed this classical conditioning, or "learning that occurs when a neutral stimulus (e.g. a tone) becomes associated with a stimulus (e.g., food) that naturally produces behavior" (Stangor and Walinga, 2014). Pavlov noticed that overtime he was able to teach (i.e., condition) the dogs to salivate upon hearing the sound of the bell (a previously neutral stimulus) because they associated it with food. It is important to note that in classical conditioning there is an automatic (i.e., biological) response in place (salivating in the case of the famous Pavlovian response experiment).
Classical conditioning is fairly limited when it comes to shaping behavior, primarily because an automatic (biological) response must already exist. For many of the things professors do in the classroom, this type of conditioning would not be particularly relevant. In contrast, operant conditioning is learning of new actions or behaviors based on the consequences of behavior (i.e., the response and/or consequences to behavior). U.S.-born psychologist BF Skinner studied how non-human animals (his research was later applied to human animals) changed their behavior through reinforcement and punishment in a process he termed operant conditioning. According to Cindy Nebel (2017):
In operant conditioning, the organism behaves in order to elicit a reward (reinforcement) or stops behaving to avoid a punishment. There are four possible consequences to behavior in operant conditioning. The behavior can be rewarded (causing it to be repeated) or punished (making it less likely to be repeated). We can either give something to the organism (called "positive" because we are adding a stimulus) or we can take something away (called "negative" because we are subtracting a stimulus).
In summation, behaviorism centers observable (and measurable) behavior (as opposed to the subconscious mind). From this perspective, we are born a tabula rasa (blank slate). Our behavior is learned through environmental factors (external stimuli) that engender a positive or negative response. This response either reinforces the behavior or eliminates it. According to behavioralists, all human behavior, regardless of complexity, is ultimately a result of this stimulus-response process (McLeod, 2020; Stangor and Walinga, 2014).
Behaviorism in the Classroom: An Example
Generally, behaviorist approaches are thought of under the umbrella of "classroom management" techniques that faculty utilize to have an orderly classroom where students meet the expectations for interpersonal behavior and course work. This is accomplished through the use of positive and negative reinforcement and punishment (as detailed above).
For example, a professor may "reward" students by allowing them to not take the final assessment if their grade is above a certain percentage. Or, provide positive, glowing feedback on a well-written essay. Remember, behaviorist approaches also consider punishments, so professors may leave critical feedback or, more commonly with younger children, take away certain "privileges" if the student misbehaves (such as missing recess or having to sit in a "time out"). The crux is that if professors provide positive reinforcement (in the form of kind words, a high score on an assignment, or another type of reward) students will respond favorably and begin to perform the desired behavior on their own without external stimuli (i.e., professor prompting).
For another example of using behaviorist approaches to encourage study habits, read this post from The Learning Scientists
Now that you have a basic idea of what behavioralist approaches are, let's address some of the PROs (seriously) and CONs (you have probably already thought of a few) of behaviorism.
The PROs of Behaviorism (Yes, there are some)
Focuses on measurable, objective outcomes (in other words- those things that are more easily evaluated on assessments)
Memorization and recall (stimulus-response learning), while somewhat tedious, provides the building blocks for higher-level cognitive tasks. Students cannot apply or compare things that they cannot define or recall.
Students experiencing the highest levels of academic difficulty may not benefit from a purely constructivist approach to learning and classroom design (more on this in a later post!) and can experience measurable benefits in their academic achievement in behavioralist-focused classrooms (Miranda, 2009).
For an example of how behavioralist approaches (in this particular case a Buddhist-infused behavioralist approach) could be helpful in the treatment of addiction, check out Judson Brewer's book, The Craving Mind: From Cigarettes to Smart-Phones to Love- Why We Get Hooked & How We can Break Bad Habits.
The CONs of Behaviorism (Now you're back on board)
Focuses primarily (only, mostly) on external stimuli or interventions and does not consider individuals' unique abilities, personalities, and previous life experiences as integral to the learning process
Does not incorporate higher-level thinking and reasoning skills (e.g., application or creation of knowledge), reflection, self-appraisal, or building a connected "classroom community."
In particular for college faculty, this approach can bore (at best) or insult (at worst) adult learners, as it does not acknowledge or integrate their prior knowledge or experience
In general, behavioralist approaches to learning, course design, and classroom management are organized around the transmission of knowledge from professor to student and emphasize "discrete and compartmentalized knowledge and skills" (Hassad, 2011). In other words, this approach would prioritize rote memorization, recall, definitions, and other lower-level academic skills. It is perhaps this element- more than the idea that we are influenced by our external environment or that teachers can have an impact on student learning through operational conditioning, especially the positive kind- that turns off so many educators to behavioralism.
Sources/Learn More:
Askew, M., V. Rhodes, M. Brown, D. William, and D. Johnson. (1997). Effective teachers of numeracy: Report of a study carried out for the Teacher Training Agency. London: King’s College London, School of Education.
Hassad, R.A. (2011). Constructivist and behavioralist approaches: Development and initial evaluation for a teaching practice scale for introductory statistics at the college level. Numeracy, 4(2), Article 7.
McLeod, S. (2017). Behaviorist Approach. SimplyPsychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/behaviorism.html
Miranda, M.V. (2009). Creating the successful community college student: Using behaviorism to foster constructivism. The Community College Enterprise, 5(1), 21-38.
Stangor, C. and J. Walinga (2014). Introduction to Psychology- 1st Canadian Edition. BC OpenTextbooks.
Comments