Activity 2.4: Evaluating Behaviorism in Practice

Activity 2.4: Evaluating Behaviorism in Practice

Question: After reading the three selections by Pryor (2002) and Kohn (2001, 2012) I have many thoughts or questions about behaviorism in practice. The question I pose for the purpose of this discussion is; is the practice of praising children (“Good job!”), a negative form of control and manipulation of their behavior, or a “powerful tool” of positive reinforcement that benefits, not only our children, but also parents, teachers and society, as a whole?

Quotation: My quotation comes from the Pryor (2002) book Don’t Shoot the Dog: "To be using reinforcement is to be involved in a process of continual change, of continual give-and-take, of continual growth. One becomes aware of the dualistic, two-way nature of this communion. One becomes more aware of others and, inevitably, more aware of oneself. It could be said that training is a process that requires one to be both inside and outside of one’s own skin at the same time. Who is the trainer (teacher) and who is the trained (student)? Both change and both learn" (p. 163).

Personal Connection: I use to hear that adults should not say “Good boy!” or “Good, Girl!” to children because it was judging the person rather that the behavior. If the child did not hear that they were good after attempting something, they might assume they were bad. Therefore, as a parent and teacher, I have been praising children’s behavior by saying “Good job!” Now I discover, according to Kohn (2002, 2012), that praising children: is manipulative, creates praise junkies, steals their pleasure, causes loss of interest, and reduces achievement (p. 3). In my experience raising my own children, after using hundreds of expressions of “Good job!” and other positive reinforcers, in my opinion Kohn is wrong. My kids worked hard and played hard, giving great effort in both academics and sports. They had the respect of their teachers and coaches, and were respectful of adults, which was a win-win for all parties involved. Their hard work, excellent grades and participation in a wide range of academic and athletic activities resulted in excellent college scholarships, which meant the cost of college for our family was minimal and they both graduated summa cum laude. We told them “Good job!”  their entire lives and they have become strong, independent, successful, and happy adults. They in turn, thank us for all of the love, support and praise. We all not only gained in this give-and-take process, we also changed and learned (Pryor, 2002, p. 163).

Outside Connection: These readings made me think of the movie Marley and Me (2008), which I saw before I fell in love with Rocko, my daughter’s puppy. Everyone I talked to who saw the film said they cried. This dog was so out of control that the dog trainer kicked Marley out of the first class. I did not understand why they would keep this dog and not give it away, or not just “shoot the animal” (p. 99), of course I am kidding.  Marley’s family needed to train him, consistently using positive reinforcers (something the subject wants), negative reinforcers (something the subject want to avoid) or a combination of both (Pryor, 2002, p. 1). Improving the behavior of some children, and some animals, seems unattainable, but the use of some of the techniques suggested by Pryor, especially the variable scheduling of reinforcements discovered in 1936 by B. F. Skinner, are quite successful if done correctly.