Activity 2.4 (Behaviorism in Practice)

            I recently watched a 60 minutes episode clip on a new generation of students call ‘Generation Y’ or ‘Millennial’ which are individuals under the age of 30. The main discussion point was how this new generation of individuals’ are so used to getting what they want when they want it (constant stimulation with the incorporation of various technical devices, games, and applications) but also grew up getting praised, supported, protected, or even coddled for much of their behavior and it was effecting how teachers interact with them along with how employers needed to adapt to them. As I read both Pryor’s (2002) selected chapters and Kohn’s (2001, 2012) articles on positive reinforcement and praise, my mind quickly referred back to this specific example as a point of reference.

            One of the main themes that I’ve noticed within these selected readings, including Skinners 1984 article, is that desirable behavior should be reinforced at that exact moment or what Pryor (2002) calls “the timing of reinforcers”. That animals and humans, the learner, needs to know that what they are doing right then, at that specific moment, was what we liked or really what they should continue to keep doing. The positive reinforcement (giving them something for good behavior, each time it happens) should be constant in the learning stage, when the connection between the behavior and the reward is being established. After the initial association has been made then the reinforcers should be presented in intervals or at random so as not to devalue/desensitize the reward that’s being presented. This is where the example of gambling or video games can be used to describe the power of scheduled reinforcement. I personally liked the example used by Skinner (1984) when explaining how the game Pac-Man can lure gamers into continuous play and how we as teachers can use this to our advantage. He says, “What is reinforcing is successful play, and in a well designed instructional program students gobble up their assignments.”

            What about giving praise though, isn’t that a positive reinforcer, and why would Kohn be suggesting that we stop giving it? The problem isn’t praise itself; it’s when we give it, what we give it for, and why we give it that’s cause for concern. Children are merely being taught to try and get attention from their caregivers or other adults, no matter what they are doing. They don’t necessarily know why they are doing it, if they have any interest in what they are doing, or what constitutes mediocre, good, and great (or highly acceptable) behaviors from one another. In addition, Kohn presents a valid point in that praise is more a benefit to the adult or one delivering the praise rather than it is for the one receiving it. It doesn’t benefit children when they become dependent on others to identify what is right or wrong, what is acceptable or unacceptable, and what they should say or not say in certain situations. We are essentially stripping them of their right to be an independent thinker. What type of adults will they turn out to be? Portraying a sense of entitlement, narcissism, and dependency (which I see often in my classroom) like many Millennials do?