Behavior and Social Theories: Pavlov, Skinner, and Bandura

Slavin (2012) says, “Behavioral learning theories are explanations of learning that emphasize observable changes in behavior” (p.116). There are two theorists in who we have studied in relation to behavioral learning. One of the theorists is Ivan Pavlov, a Russian scientist in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. Pavlov believed in classical conditioning. According to Slavin (2012) “Classical conditioning is the process of repeatedly associating a previously neutral stimulus with an unconditioned stimulus in order to evoke a conditioned response” (p.118).  Another person who studied human behavior was B.F. Skinner. He developed the theory of operant conditioning. Slavin (2012) says, “Operant conditioning uses pleasant and unpleasant consequences to control the occurrence of behavior” (p.118).  Also discussed in the chapter is the social learning theory in which a man named Bandura attributes learned behaviors from modeling and observation.

These concepts of behavior are significant to me in terms of my classroom management. For example, I use a behavior scale in my classroom and once a child gets to super student then he or she can color in a number square in the “super student notebook.” The child has five number squares of his or her own and once the child colors in all five squares then he or she gets a special prize. I would consider this operant conditioning because I am using a pleasant consequence to control the behavior. An example of how I could use Pavlov’s classical conditioning theory in my classroom is when I use a bell of my own. The first day of the school year I would simply say, “Okay, time to put your things away. The table to get ready first will receive a tally mark.” On the second day of school I could say “when you hear the bell it is time to put your things away and get ready for the next part of the day. The table to be ready first gets a tally mark.” Eventually, when my students hear the once neutral stimulus turned conditioned stimulus, bell, then they will automatically associate it with the unconditioned stimulus, tally marks, which leads to the conditioned response of quickly getting ready for the next part of the day.

As discussed in our discussion topic for the week, reinforcement strengthens a behavior and be can be either negative or positive. Positive reinforcers include things such as saying “good job!” or anything that has do to with praise. It is important to remember that negative reinforcers are often misinterpreted as a punishment but in actuality they are just an escape for unpleasant situations (Slavin, 2012, p.120). An example of a negative reinforcement that I can use in my classroom would be if I told my students that if they all made a 100 on this week’s spelling test then I would not give them the spelling test for next week.

One concept that I learned more about is the social learning theory. The social learning theory presented by Bandura consists of four phases; attentional, retention, reproduction, and motivational. For the purpose of this reflection I would like to take more note to the motivational phase. The motivational phase is one that I see as positive and negative for the students. The phase is positive simply because it causes students to behave due to receiving praise (Slavin, 2012, p.133). The negative side to the motivational phase is that most students aren’t really self-motivated to behave because it is the right thing to do. I like to provide many learning opportunities in my classroom that allows my students to be self-motivated to do their best simply because it is the right thing to do.

In all, behavioral theories and social theories both discuss the importance behaviors being learned through either modeling, observation, or through true experience. I take a little bit of each of the three theories presented in this chapter to my classroom in hopes are having great classroom management.

References

Slavin, R.E. (2012). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (10^th ed.). Boston:Pearson.

Cognitive Development: Piaget and Vygotsky

            I find myself very interested in the development of children. Piaget, born in Switzerland in 1896 and Vygotsky, born in Russia in 1896 both expressed their ideas of development. Piaget’s idea is centered on age groups and four stages of cognitive development; sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational, and formal operational. Vygotsky’s ideas are centered around a child’s learning environment, putting emphasis on learning rather than development. To be honest, I take a little bit of both ideas with me when I am working with a child. I honestly believe that children learn behaviors and thinking abilities from their environment. I also believe that Piaget’s stages are somewhat accurate based on my experiences so far in teaching. I do not have children of my own but I am the oldest grandchild of eighteen with a seven year gap between I and the next child and I have witnessed many of the concepts stated in Piaget’s stages such as the object permanence with babies.

            To be completely honest, I’ve known the work of Piaget and Vygotsky since taking Psychology in high school but for some reason I always emphasized Piaget when teaching. After the readings and connecting them to my experiences with my gifted students, I was able to see the benefit of embracing Vygotsky’s idea as well. Slavin (2012) says, “He believed that development depends on the sign systems that individuals grow up with: the symbols that cultures create to help people think, communicate, and solve problems-for example, a culture’s language, writing system, or counting system” (p.41). For example, my students who did not attend pre-kindergarten or who did not practice writing their names and letters at a young age now have trouble with the concept of writing. The concepts presented in chapter two are critical to any educator and his or her classroom because it is important to understand the children’s decisions and rationales. According to Piaget, I cannot expect that my second grade students will be able to analyze a topic as well as the high school students that I tutor. But, in contrast, I also teach the gifted cluster of second graders and some of them can actually think abstractly. Like Shelly Hodges said in her discussion post, “Well as educators, having an understanding of Piaget’s theories or contributions to education, we can better plan lessons for our students that take into account their cognitive development.” By knowing each student’s cognitive ability we will be able to properly accommodate to the needs of that particular child.

In having my gifted endorsement I do know that a person’s ability to be gifted can be partially because of their learning environment at home. Based on my learning, I know that I am now more aware of why my students act the way that they do while participating in certain activities in class. Knowing these concepts will help me become a better teacher because I also realize that I have to be more aware of their home environment. If I have a student who is not succeeding then their development can be negatively impacted by the lack of support at home. Knowing their home environment will help me reach out to the parents more and will help me provide them with mini workshops and materials that can better help their child. It is great to be learning more about these concepts while in the summer semester because as I prepare for the next school year I can definitely keep them in mind when creating new activities for my students and when communicating with my parents. 

References

Slavin, R. E. (2012). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson.