Reflective Journal 2

Describe:

Learning is something that people inherently do. Whether it is crying to be fed or making connecting the concepts of multiplication and division, we are always learning. Learning and development are indisputably linked. The learning of behaviors, thought, and social cues is learning that develops over time.

Behavioral learning theories are “explanations of learning that emphasize observable changes in behavior,” (p. 116). Two notable theorists studied behavioral learning by observing different types of conditioning. Ivan Pavlov studied classical conditioning. This type of conditioning is “the process of repeatedly associating a previously neutral stimulus with an unconditioned stimulus in order to evoke a conditioned response,” (p. 117). Pavlov’s experiments with dogs demonstrated that learning could affect that which is involuntary. B.F. Skinner, on the other hand, studied operant conditioning. Operant conditioning uses pleasant or unpleasant consequences in order to influence behavior. Skinner’s work shows that behavior can be influenced based on what sort of consequences are given.

Principles of behavioral learning include: consequences, reinforcers, punishers, shaping, extinction, schedules of reinforcement, and antecedents. All of these principles influence behavior in some form. Reinforcers are used to strengthen a behavior while punishers are used to weaken a behavior. There are many different types of reinforcers including primary and secondary, positive and negative, and intrinsic and extrinsic. Positive and negative reinforcers are those that are most observable. A positive reinforce might be telling a student that they have done good work or giving them a reward, but a negative reinforcer is taking away something unpleasurable, such as homework, as a reward in its place. Punishers are also observable in a classroom. The text points out, though, that both punishers and reinforcers should be consequences that are given immediately. Immediate feedback “makes clear the connection between behavior and consequences, and also increases the value of the feedback,” (p.126). The text also argues that reinforcement should be given on a schedule and it should be carefully planned and thought through. Offering reinforcement at all times decreases work ethic and the effectiveness of reinforcement.

Social learning theory, developed by Albert Bandura, utilizes the research of behavioral learning theorists, but focuses on the importance of observational learning and self-regulated learning. Bandura theorizes that learning is most efficiently shaped by learning from a model. He refers to this as observational learning.  One effective use of modeling for classroom management is vicarious learning. We can use vicarious learning by praising appropriate responses and behaviors. Bandura also suggests that people learn by observing not only others, but themselves as well. This is referred to as self-regulated learning. Self-regulated learning has been further studied by psychologist Donald Meichenbaum who developed a model for self-instruction. Self-regulated leaning is a way to encourage students to really think about their thought (p.135). Self-reinforcement is a way to combine behavioral learning theory with social learning theory in order to develop reflective students who are able to change their own behaviors.

Analyze:

Behavioral learning theories are excellent to be aware of in the classroom. The fact that they are based on observable behaviors makes them easily accessible for classroom management strategies. I take note of these observable behaviors everyday, and it is an asset to know research behind the best times to reinforce and the necessary times to punish. Often in my classroom, I give verbal praise. According to the text, I do this much too often. I tend to give praise whenever my students attempt to do something, but I do not always give them feedback and encourage them to fix things. By not using a schedule of reinforcement, I may be making my reinforcement less effective. A schedule of reinforcement is a set of parameters for when and why positive reinforcement should be given. Having rules for when and why I give reinforcers is something that would benefit my students. Not always giving them reinforcement and knowing what I give reinforcement for would help them to build up generalizations about what is good work and good behavior, (p.131).

The discussions for this week helped me to see many different viewpoints. I liked hearing from the teachers of different grade levels and how they normally deal with behavior problems. Many teachers wrote about how their students might see going to the office as a positive or negative reinforcement or wrong behavior. Sending a child to the office could be a negative reinforcement if their wrong behavior gets them out of the classroom where they do not want to be. If we look at it this way, then the child is not learning anything but that their teacher can be manipulated. One of my classmates, Pam Hargrove, mentioned that if she sent a child to the office then she was showing her students that she was incapable of handling their behavior, and that she was just opening the door to more bad behavior. Her solution to this problem was to start out the beginning of the year making the students self-reflect about their behavior. I thought that her argument was excellent and I could see why she saw going to the office not as a punishment, but as a reinforcer. Other teachers, however, gave some examples of when going to the office could be a positive reinforcement for good behavior. One example I saw was “the principal’s lunch club.” This reward would be for excellent behavior and it would give students a little time out of class as reinforcement. Reading all of the responses left me with the conclusion that sending a student to the office is not always the punishment that we need it to be. It always depends on the student’s frame of mind and it is our job to figure out the best way to give consequences for each student.

Reflect:

Significance of the concept concerning the context my classroom…

Social and behavioral learning theories are essential for any classroom. In order to have solid classroom management, we must understand observable behaviors. Behavioral learning theories teach us to consider what consequences must be given, and if those consequences should be reinforcement of behavior or a punishment for a behavior. In my own classroom, the text has taught me to put more value on positive reinforcement. Often times in my own class, I hand out praise for anything and everything. My students, of course, are at a young age where they need positive reinforcement often, but I also need to keep in mind that the students have to build up some confidence in themselves. I need to let them judge their own work sometimes and tell me if it needs more work or if it is finished. I want my students to be able to do work without being reliant upon my praises.

Positive aspects for this concept…

I see many positive aspects for what I have learned about this week. Knowing more about students and the ways they think is always positive. An especially meaningful part that I learned about is that of self-regulation. I believe that self-regulation s critical for molding students into successful adults. In the classroom, we can teach self-regulation in many different ways, but it is important to not forget about it. I think that a great way to use self-regulation would be for the students to monitor their own behavior. In the book, there is an example of how a teacher gave students a behavior scale and they had to rate themselves each day. If they matched the teacher’s rating of good behavior, they were rewarded. If I were to use this in my classroom, I would extend the rating by requiring the students to explain why they rated themselves in the manner that they did. This self-regulation would be motivation to do better and would teach self-reflection.

Handling a situation differently based on this learned information…

Based on what I have learned, I will definitely handle consequences better. In the past, I have given consequences (both reinforcers and punishers) with delay instead of immediacy. The text speaks on the importance of immediately giving consequences instead of delaying them because of value placed on the consequences. I think that this is most critical with the deliverance of punishers. Often times in my classroom students have to sit out of recess for five minutes for getting three strikes. I usually keep up with these strikes in my head, but I think it may be more effective to be punished immediately in some instances. For example, if a child has misused materials or not listened to instructions during center time, it would be more appropriate to take them out of centers and have them sit at their desks. Center time in my classroom is free play and free choice, so it is a difficult time to manage and I definitely need to be more consistent in both my schedule of reinforcement and punishments.

My learning confirmed my knowledge about teaching…

This week’s learning definitely confirmed to me that it is very important to get to know children. If we do not know our students and understand them, then it is nearly impossible to be able to correctly discipline them in an effective manner.

Reference

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

Reflective Journal 1

Describe:

 This week's reading focused on cognitive development and its applications for education and literacy development. Two main theorists are discussed throughout the chapter- Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky. While they agree on many aspects of development, they have some key differences in thought. 

Jean Piaget was a Swiss developmental psychologist. In his studies of his own children, he noticed that they seemed to learn based on their “manipulation of and interaction with the environment,” (Slavin, 2012). His theory of cognitive development proposes that children learn and progress through four specific stages. Each stage is recognized by children’s new abilities, ways of figuring out problems, and thinking. Piaget’s thinking is centered around the concept of ‘schemes.’ A scheme is “[a] mental pattern that guide[s] behavior,” (Slavin, 2012). According to Piaget, schemes are the building blocks to all future learning. Throughout each stage, new schemas are built and old ones are added onto and can be changed with new understanding. Piaget’s stages of cognitive development are defined by age. From birth to two years, children are in the sensorimotor stage. In this stage, children develop from babies that have only reflexes to toddlers who use trial-and-error methods to get what they desire. The following stage is the preoperational stage and takes place from the age of two to seven years. The preoperational stage is characterized by a lack of understanding about conservation. Conservation is the concept that certain properties of objects remain the same regardless of changes in other properties (Slavin, 2012). Children’s thinking in this stage is very egocentric, and they therefore believe that everyone around them sees thing in the ways that they do. They cannot take the perspective of others. The third stage is named concrete operational, and children develop through this stages between the ages of seven and eleven. In this stage, children “can form concepts, see relationships, and solve problems, but only as long as they involve objects and situations that are familiar,” (Slavin, 2012). Children are beginning to become less egocentric, can think about objects abstractly, and are able to reverse their thinking. The final stage of cognitive development is the formal operational stage. According to Piaget, this stage takes place from the age of eleven and continues through adulthood. In this stage, children are able to think totally abstractly and are able to consider the hypothetical.

Today, many agree with Piaget’s theory that development takes place in stages, however, most do not think that these stages of development are locked by age. It is also widely viewed that children learn from experiences and these experiences “have a strong influence on development,” (Slavin, 2012), while Piaget mostly considered certain tasks in his studies.

Lev Vygotsky was a Russian psychologist who also studied cognitive development. Vygotsky’s theory of development does not focus on a distinct set of stages, rather, his theories focus on how children learn. Where “Piaget’s study suggests that development precedes learning…Vygotsky’s theory suggests that learning precedes development,” (Slavin, 2012). He believed that development occurs as a child develops self-regulation, or “the ability to think and solve problems without the help of others,” (Slavin, 2012). He taught that for children, learning takes place in the zone of proximal development. This is the area of learning where children are challenged, but are capable of being guided toward understanding. It is just above their current level of understanding. He also theorized that scaffolding was a way to teach in which a concept is introduced and highly supported, but after a while the learner is slowly given less and less support with their acquisition of more understanding. 

  

Analyze:

The theories of both Piaget and Vygotsky are critical for teachers to keep in mind. We must realize that students do have different understandings and abilities as they grow, but we also cannot forget that every child is different and learns in a different way and at a different pace. I personally agree more with Vygotsky’s views on cognitive development because of my experience with young learners. As a pre-k teacher, I teach the minds of four and five year olds every day. According to Piaget, all of these students should be in a preoperational stage and they should not be able to reason logically or reverse their thinking; however, I have found that some of my students are able to make logical decisions and justify them and a few are able to reverse their thinking. This shows that the age range of development does not matter quite as much as the experiences of the child. Some of my students have had little exposure to critical thinking and their logic skills are not developed. Those that have older siblings, previous exposure to school, and parents that actively promote their learning are able to reason and logically justify statements and decisions. Thi shows me that I cannot simply rely on an age range to know how to approach teaching- I have to know where each student falls developmentally and go from there.

I found the discussion posts from this week to be very interesting. I think that all of the teachers had a firm grasp of Piaget’s theory of cognitive development and I enjoyed learning about their perspectives on what it would be like to teach science to second graders versus eighth graders. In many of the posts, teachers refered to using the concrete with second graders and only exposing them to things that they were already familiar with. These ideas are supported by Piaget’s research on the concrete operational stage. In this stage it is most effective to teach from what students are familiar. Many used examples of teaching about plants or weather. This is because second grade students, seven and eight year olds, have experience with these science concepts. The approach that most took with teaching eighth graders was to have students use the scientific methods, consider possibilities, and form conclusions based on tests. This way of teaching requires a high level of reasoning and hypothetical thought. These ideas of appealing to the abstract thinking abilities of eighth graders are aligned with Piaget’s formal operational stage of development.

Reflect:

How is this concept significant concerning the context of your classroom?

In my classroom, I know that I teach students that are either four or five. The theories that I read about this week gave me a better understanding of what they are not only capable of but incapable of at their age. I will be able to approach my students from a developmentally appropriate stance knowing that they cannot think abstractly and that they need concrete experiences to learn.

What are the positive or negative aspects for this concept?

The positive aspect of theories of cognitive development is that they provide a baseline or rough guideline for which to approach teaching. Without knowing that the five year olds in my classroom are incapable of abstract thought, I might give them hypothetical situations that would only confuse them; however, knowing where to start and having some information for where they cognitively should be helps me to teach appropriately. It also helps me to know when a child is behind. For example, I had a student this past year who was nonverbal, even in what Vygotsky would call private speech. He also relied on pointing to objects as a way of communication. This showed me that he was cognitively far behind the other students in my classroom and I was able to refer him for observation by specialists in the school. Another positive aspect is that it promotes scaffolding and teaches about the zone of proximal development. I am a firm believer that learning happens when we are being challenged- but not when we have been challenged to the point of frustration. The zone of proximal development teaches students to reach for new and deeper understandings with the help of their teachers. It is supported by scaffolding which is taken away a little at the time as students develop richer understandings of what they have been learning about. These two concepts are essential in teaching all subjects, especially mathematics and literacy.

How might you handle a situation or activity differently based on this learned information?

Based on my reading and understanding, in the future I will always consider how my students learn best. Often times when giving instructions, I will give my students hypothetical situations of how things can go wrong. If I really want these consequences to stick, I am going to start giving them real examples, not just verbal ones.

How did this event change or confirm your knowledge or beliefs about teaching?

This reading confirmed my beliefs that all learners are different and that experiences and home-life truly do affect students’ learning. Certainly there are stages of growth that children have to go through and realizations that must make, but this does not happen t the same time or in the same way for every student. I have also been confirmed in my belief that the best way to teach students is to first give them a lot of support and to slowly let go and allow them to experience the learning for themselves. This is especially true for very young learners like the ones in my classroom. Each week we focus on one math concept and it is critical that I start out with heavy support showing them each counting bear, bean, cube, and numeral that we are working with, and discussing each move that I make. Gradually, I let them control more of the conversation and at the end of the week, I help them to do the concept themselves. This could take the form of counting to five or adding onto! I so enjoy seeing them make connection from the challenge when I present an attainable goal!

Reference

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