Does Behavioral Theory Belong in Classroom Management?

      In theory, operant conditioning  (Skinner, 1953) is a learning process that involves an increase or decrease in the likelihood of a targeted behavior resulting from provided consequences.  Consequences can be either reinforcements or punishments.  While child-centered classroom management advocates such as Noddings (2001) and Kohn (2006), hold behavioral theories in disrepute, there is still a place for basic elements of behavioral theory when striving to develop a classroom culture of mutual respect, high expectations, and civility.  Few would argue that these tenets lay the foundation whereby constructivist, child-centered principles can then take hold to build nurturing learning communities aimed at helping students independently make good choices and develop self-management.    

      Educators should use reinforcements only when the expectation is to increase or minimally maintain the desired behavior.  By contrast, use a punishment only when the desire is to remove or mitigate an undesired behavior.  Anything else is fraught with possible unintended consequences.

      For positive reinforcement, the reinforcer should be seen as important, desirable, or relevant to those exhibiting the desired behavior.  Reformists such as Noddings (2001) and Kohn criticize behavioral theory for classroom management on this point because they don’t believe in reinforcing good behavior and punishing students for poor behavior, advocating that students should have more choices and opinions.  Yet even Kohn acknowledges structures and restrictions are acceptable if “they protect students, provide for flexibility, are developmentally appropriate, and lead to student involvement” (Arends, 2012, p. 206). 

      In this regard, using praise to promote understanding of high expectations, mutual respect, and civility is an important classroom management approach, especially for younger students needing to learn socially from those more cognitively or socially advanced (Vygotsky, 1978). Raising self-awareness, self-management, and social awareness are important tools for the child-centered approach.  Yet, is it possible to completely divorce classroom management from strategies grounded in behavioral theory?

      “Let’s see who else will quietly raise their hand to answer the next question.  Thank you for sitting so quietly and raising your hand.”  This simple strategy, grounded in behavioral theory, will quickly help develop a desired classroom culture based on high expectations, mutual respect, and civility.

      So how did behavioral theory get such a bad reputation?  Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?  Any theory aligned with training or “conditioning” animals is going to be problematic with parents.  Who wants to think their school is “training” children? 

     The concern with teachers using behavioral theory as the core of their classroom management is the likelihood a certain behavior will increase due to the presentation of something pleasant after the behavior.  The misuse of “punishment” based on the perception that yelling, humiliating, or embarrassing students initially works too often results in the increase in yelling, humiliating, or embarrassing students.  Good people can easily become bullies rather than teachers. 

      For this reason, anyone seeking to implement elements of behavioral theory into his or her classroom management should avoid punishment.  It is also very important to avoid confusing negative reinforcement and punishment.  They are different.  Negative reinforcement involves an increase in a behavior.  By contrast, punishment involves a decrease in a behavior (Amabile, 1985).  Because of the unintended consequences often resulting from the misuse of negative reinforcement, avoid this strategy too! 

      As an example, if a young mother closes the door when her child tantrums and experiences peace and quiet thereafter, she would be inclined to repeat the door closing strategy to thereby experience more peace and quiet.  Therefore, this is an example of negative reinforcement.  Notice that while the mother realizes increased peace and quiet, the increase in door closing whenever her child tantrums holds the possibility of unintended consequences related to the child's behavior.  Is there any effort to identify the cause of the child's behavior?

      How does this appear in the school?  If a teacher closes the door when a neighbor's noisy students are returning from recess and thereafter experiences quiet in her class, she would be inclined to repeat the door closing strategy to experience quiet whenever a neighbor's noisy students are returning from recess.  Therefore, this is an example of negative reinforcement.  Notice that while the teacher closing the door increases quiet in her classroom, the increase in door closing whenever her neighbor's noisy students are returning from recess holds the possibility of unintended consequences related to the neighbor's noisy students behavior.  Is there any effort to mitigate the behaviors exhibited by the neighbor's noisy students? 

      Too often, the result of negative reinforcement is the offending stimuli ends up shaping your behavior.  Educators should reflect upon how negative reinforcement can reinforce bad habits.  As a social constructivist (Vygotsky, 1978), the educator should recognize the ability to shape the offending behavior/stimuli to ensure high expectations, mutual respect, and civility within the class room and school.

References

Amabile, T. M. (1985). Motivation and creativity: Effects of motivational orientation on 
       creative writers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 393-399.

Arends, R.I (2012). Learning to Teach, 9/e. McGraw Hill. ISBN: 978-0-07-802432-0