Module 1: Behaviorism

A dichotomy exists within the brain. We would do well to understand this duality. The automatic mind defined by Bargh and Chartrand (1999) is one which reacts to and operates within an environmental framework defined by myriad and complicated successions of stimuli. This is contrasted against our volitional mind, consisting of conscious actions and aspects with which we are more familiar. It seems to operate at odds with this automaticity. At the very least, I think I am conflicted by the interplay between these two functionalities.

I cannot enumerate the times I have sat down and willed myself to lose weight, start a pattern of studying,  stop watching so much television and so many other things only to fail and fall back into old patterns. It is clear that will is not enough and that other forces are at play with regard to human behavior, at least my own. If will were enough, I feel as though I would be far more accomplished in life and simply be a more evolved human being.

I am not sure if we are all simply products of our environments and reinforcement histories. I believe the quote Dr. Usher tenders at the end of her PowerPoint is probably closer to the "truth" with regard to how humans behave:

“I like to be human because in my unfinishedness I know that I am conditioned. Yet conscious of such conditioning, I know that I can go beyond it, which is the essential difference between conditioned and determined existence.”
Paulo Freire,
Pedagogy of Freedom, p. 54

As a way of expanding on the summation offered by Dr. Usher, I present a quote of my own, which is a summation of some of Aristotle's thoughts on the matter:

"...we are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit:"
(Durant, 1968, p. 98)

I think it is important here to interject something James wrote when referring to will. Here is a sentence which may shed some light on the subject of will versus automatic action:

"So you see that volition, in the narrower sense, takes place only when there are a number of conflicting systems of ideas, and depends on our having a complex field of consciousness."

James declares that volition only occurs after the natural and more ready interactions in the brain short each other out and the brain is forced to make a choice.

I believe that I am largely a product of my environment, but ultimately I may decide to choose another path, to set myself upon a different enforcement schedule, to ultimately assert my will. In my opinion, human behavior and even humanity may not be so pigeonholed by a single philosophy. However, our past history is often a very good indicator of what we might accomplish or what we might be capable of in the future. The caveat here is that we have the power to change. The proviso is that changing this automatic brain is not an easy accomplishment.

When I think of these things, it causes me to reflect back on my horrible undergraduate career and my comparatively stellar performance in graduate school. In the admissions process, we make a determination of fitness based on past performance. I was fully admitted, but there were some questions raised by my advisor. Getting in to UK's program was by comparison a breeze because I could show a habitual pattern of success. In other words, it is easier to perpetuate existing good behavior patterns as well as demonstrate this to others than it is to begin new habits or to try to convince others that one is capable of such action without such a history.

This is something noteworthy with regard to education and how teachers might show children the right path. It is a concept that transcends the curriculum. People are capable of change at any time and that there are practices (thinking back to James' chapter on the laws of habit) which can assist students make changes in their automatic behaviors at a formative stage rather than waiting until patterns are already established.

Another concept I came across in some ancillary readings is the concept of inner locus of control. Personality psychologist Julian Rotter did work in the 1950s and 60s with regard to how much control does a person feel like one has over his or her own life. Those who feel more in charge of their lives tend to be more motivated and content with their lives (Urbana-Champaign, 2011). According to this article, Rotter's work bridged the gap between behaviorism and cognitive psychology, which is the more accepted philosophies and theories with regard to most types of mental health counseling today.

So why, then, should we consider behaviorism with regard to education? I believe it is because appealing to these natural forces is a more efficient way to impart certain types of information through certain pedagogical practices and that forming good habits early is far easier than extinguishing previously undesirable patterns of behavior. It must be noted that Skinner was unrelenting in his assertions that behaviorism and operant conditioning were pervaded every facet of our being. For that reason, his philosophy was labeled radical behaviorism.

In the article assigned in the readings (1984) and in his book The Technology of Teaching (1968), Skinner derides the current state of classrooms as an aversive educational environment, one where students are weighted with sanctions and negative enforcement, made anxious and uncomfortable by not being able to work at their own pace and not receiving quick feedback for their work.

Skinner proposed a system of learning designed to leverage the automatic mind's desire for stimulus and processing of response years before the first personal computer came to market. He posited that there are ways to structure information so that students could review more information in the time allotted by working at their own individual pace with the help of teachers as learning assistants rather than pacemakers for an entire class.

Ultimately, we know that this automatic mind exists and that for certain types of education (such as special education) and certain educational outcomes (such as well structured domains of knowledge), there are specific types of tools for which modification of behavior are the best fit. Yet they can serve the educator at critical times regardless of the pedagogical methods required when we need to consider how to motivate and stimulate our students.

References

Bargh, J. A., & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psychologist, 4, 462-479


Durant, Will (1926). The story of philosophy: the lives and opinions of the greater philosophers. Retrieved November 1, 2011, from http://books.google.com/books?id=ZUnhlEiAlcMC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink: The power of thinking without thinking. New York: Little, Brown and Company.

James, W. (1962). Talks to teachers on psychology and to students on some of life's ideals. New York: Dover. (Original work published 1899)


Skinner, B. F. (1968). The Technology of Teaching. New York: Meredith Corporation.

Urbana-Champaign, U. o. I. a. (2011). Locus of Control Retrieved November 1, 2011, from http://wik.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/Locus_of_control