The relationship between behaviorism, instructional strategies, and technology tools is vitally important to the classroom because it gives teachers the ability to personalize education while setting uniform precedents for their students. As my popular article stated, some say “behaviorist dogma has elapsed,” studying its functions and integrating behaviorist philosophy into the classroom can enhance the effectiveness of technology tools and instructional strategies (Wade, 2011). According to my professional article this week, the ultimate goal of behaviorism is to take the behaviorist theory and “invoke observable environmental, physiological, and behavioral variables as proxies or surrogates that operationally define the theoretical constructs in the theory” (Moore, 2013). In other words, positive and negative reinforcement is used to highlight positive or negative behavior exhibited by students in the classroom. This data is observed, studied and practically applied by the instructor in a uniform way to identify individual behavior patterns and regulate action. This behavior regulation increases the effectiveness of instructional strategies and technology tools by motivating students to express similar positive actions. When students express similar responses to technology tools, for example, teachers have an increased ability to measure class performance and lesson plan in response to student weaknesses.
As a result of behaviorist learning theory, teachers can use one curriculum to appease the varied needs of all their students while modifying their approach to each individual. According to the ISTE teaching standards, this integrates both designer and analyst teaching qualities. As an analyst, educators track the data regarding student behavior and assess what type of affect their positive and negative reinforcements had on behavioral changes. In response, teachers exhibit the ‘designer’ standard where “educators design authentic, learner-driven activities and environments that recognize and accommodate learner variability” (ISTE, 2008). Beyond improving student behavior, I believe this learning strategy allows students to “communicate clearly and express themselves creatively for a variety of purposes using the platforms, tools, styles, formats and digital media appropriate to their goals” (ISTE, 2016). Students that feel more confident to express themselves can provide their teachers with important feedback on their experience with technology in the classroom and course content. Ultimately, this facilitates better teacher student interaction.
For Hour of Code and Genius Hour, I feel as though behavior management is key in helping those programs be effective. These programs are student led, therefore reinforcing positive and negative behavior will give the students a clear picture of how they are expected to behave and help them to manage their own learning. Orey (2015a) states that “You always want to reinforce the appropriate behaviors. That's the more powerful of the two”. In doing this the students will want the positive reinforcement and mimic the desirable behavior.
References
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2016). Standards for students. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/standards/for-students-2016
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2008). Standards for students. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/standards/standards-for-teachers
Laureate Education (Producer). (2015a). Behaviorist learning theory [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Moore, J. (2013). THREE VIEWS OF BEHAVIORISM. Psychological Record, 63(3), 681-691. doi:10.11133/j.tpr.2013.63.3.020
Wade, M. (2011). The Learning Theory that Could–Behaviorism and the 21st Century. Retrieved July, 2017, from http://cybergogue.blogspot.com/2011/10/behaviorism-learning-theory.html
