Module 3: Chapter 7

 Concept 1: Positive and Negative Reinforcement

Summary:  One of the main topics discussed in Chapter 7 was the use of positive and negative reinforcers within the operant conditioning theory. According to Woolfolk, a reinforcer is "any consequence that strengthens the behavior it follows." (Woolfolk 267) There are thus two ways of reinforcing behavior, which will increase or strengthen the behavior the next time it occurs. Positive reinforcement "occurs when the behavior or response leads to the appearance or presentation of a new stimulus" and negative reinforcement occurs when "the consequence that strengthens a behavior is the removal (subtraction) of a stimulus." (Woolfolk 268). The author also points out that there is a clear difference between punishment and negative reinforcement: "the 'negative' in negative reinforcement does not imply that the behavior being reinforced is necessarily negative or bad. The meaning is closer to that of 'negative' numbers--something is subtracted." (Woolfolk 268) Overall, each form of reinforcement can strengthen behavior. Punishment is different because it "always involves decreasing or suppressing behavior." (Woolfolk 268). Thus, as teachers, we must remember these distinctions and use each technique carefully. 

Reflection:  This section of the text really caused me to reflect on the types of operant conditioning that the teacher in my classroom and myself have used in the classroom this past school year. For example, when we reprimanded our students, we were most likely using negative reinforcement, because we made it clear that if their behavior did not change, priveledges such as "Fun Friday" - time at the end of each Friday where students were able to have free time or do something fun in class, like watch a video - would be taken away. But I also think of the student who had a behavior chart in place. The teacher made him a simple chart. Two questions were typed for each subject of the day: "Did I say expected things?" and "Did I do my work?" These were the issues he was having trouble with. If he circled more "yeses" than "nos" on his chart, he would earn his reward. If he did not, then he would not be able to get what he was working for. Thus, we were using a combination of positive reinforcement - adding a stimulus - and negative reinforcement - taking away a stimulus. But, there was not usually punishment involved. I now see the difference between negative reinforcement and punishment more clearly: we wanted this student to stop the behaviors that were distracting or detrimental to his learning, but we also wanted good behavior to continue. So, simply punishing him to stop the behavior would not have necessarily been effective long-term. The combination of reinforcement that was used did work. The student's problematic behaviors decreased, and he seemed genuinely proud when he had a "perfect day" and got to circle "yeses" for each part of the school day. We also got positive feedback from his guardian at home that his behavior was improving outside of the classroom. This shows me that using reinforcers can produce a noticeable difference in behavior, even in students with IEPs or autism, which this student had. For another student, this may not have worked so well, which is why I feel it is so important to consider each child as much as possible before implementing any behavior management plan. 

Concept 2: The Premack Principle

Summary: The text also mentions the ways that good behaviors can be reinforced or strengthened, and outlines methods such as praise and teacher attention, contingency contracts, and group consequences. A method that is highlighted for choosing what reinforcers and rewards to use is the Premack Principle. According to Woolfolk, "a preferred activity can be an effective reinforcer for a less-preferred activity." (Woolfolk 273). Thus, this strategy can be summarized as "First, do what I want you to do, and then you may do what I want you to do." (Woolfolk 273). It is also suggested that teachers observe what students like to do in their free time, and then pick the best reinforcer to use for this technique based on these observations. 

Reflection:  When I read about Premack's Principle, I immediately thought of the classroom I currently work in. The class is a Special Education room for students with autism. The teacher I work with uses the principle often when working with students, and I feel that it helps the kids stay on task and get their focus recentered. The directions were given very clearly, which I also believe made it more effective. For example, when a student wanted to have free time on his Chromebook but we were just starting math instruction, the response would be, "First math, then Chromebook time." At other times, this was used less directly, but the method still worked. We knew that the kids loved to watch videos on Youtube, so that would always be a part of every "Fun Friday." The teacher made it clear that there would only be a "Fun Friday" if the kids worked hard and focused. Usually, this worked, and we would not have issues with students being unfocused or disruptive on Fridays that I can recall. 

Initially, I have to admit that I thought the strategy of "First this, then that," was one exclusively for kids with IEPs or diagnoses of autism or learning disabilities, but now I realize that this is a common technique for all classrooms. If the students know that there is a reward or incentive waiting for them after they complete the task they're working on or achieve the desired behavior, motivation is easier. Every student is different, of course, and maybe not every incentive will be appealing to each child, but the rewards can also be altered as needed for flexibility. I think this strategy is particularly effective for managing behaviors as opposed to academic performance. Students should feel engaged in their learning, so ideally this will not have to be used to "get" them to stay on task. However, encouraging expected and positive behavior using the Premack Principle will steer the student towards "being good" for the sake of being a good person and doing the right thing, and taking pride in themselves. 

Concept 3: Being Cautious with Punishment

Summary: After discussing punishment, Woolfolk makes clear that exclusively using punishment - at home or in the classroom -- can be detrimental to students. "... study after study shows that punishment by itself, as usually practiced in homes and schools, just doesn't work. It tells children what to stop doing (often, they knew that already), but it does not teach them what to do instead." (Woolfolk 280).  The author goes on to mention other drawbacks of using punishment, even going so far as to assert that "punishment in and of itself does not lead to any positive behavior." (Woolfolk 280). Additionally, the text mentions that using punishment is most effective when the "potential punisher" -- the teacher -- is around. If the teacher is not there, the students will not behave, which leaves room for misbehavior if, for example, a substitute teacher is teaching the class for the day. Other arguments against punishment discussed in this section include that using it does not promote empathy for others and can impede developing a caring relationship with students. (Woolfolk 282).

Reflection: I have to say that I agree that using punishment exclusively is not an effective way to manage a classroom. When I was first out of college, I was a substitute teacher in a few school districts in my area for a few years. There were some classrooms that I walked into, and the children seemed almost determined to misbehave and act up. Often, the teacher outlined their behavior management plan in the notes that were left for me, but even using this did not always work. I frequently reminded students who were acting out that the teacher would be back, and that I was noting who misbehaved and who was a "helper" and was on task. When I shared my experiences with other teachers in the building or other substitutes, many said similar things, "Oh, that happens. They think because the teacher is gone that they have a free day." "They're going to try and test your limits, see what they can get away with." While these may have been true in some cases, I wonder now if some of the teachers I subbed for used punishment a lot, and that was why the students didn't seem to want to listen to me. It is also possible that I was not being firm enough when I implemented the teachers' plans, which sometimes involved positive reinforcement and token systems. However, this experience shows me that when I have my own classroom, I have to be sure that I do not resort to using punishment exclusively to correct misbehavior. If I did, the plan would be vulnerable to falling apart when I was not in the room - even if I stepped out for a moment! I also want to be sure that I develop a caring relationship with my students from the start, so I believe that even when punishment is needed, I will only use it as part of the "two-pronged attack" that Woolfolk describes - I will also make it very clear what the student should have been doing instead of the misbehavior (Woolfolk 281). The focus should be on the positive behavior, not the misbehavior the student is engaging in. I also feel it is important to make sure students develop empathy. In today's world, children -- especially teenagers -- are constantly engaging with technology, at the expense of spending more face-to-face time with one another. This can be detrimental to developing empathy and understanding for others. Thus, I want to be sure that I foster students' sense of empathy, and punishment does not provide any lasting lessons beyond, "don't do this again, or [punishment]." Even if it is explained, positive reinforcement needs to go along with any punishments - such as rewarding the expected behavior and certainly explaining why the misbehavior was not acceptable. However, it does seem that most modern classrooms incorporate different forms of operant conditioning, which is encouraging.