Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Behaviorism and Social Cognition

Ormrod (2011) defines behaviorism as the "theoretical perspective in which learning and behavior are described and explained in terms of stimulus-response relationships" (p. 285). Behaviorism focuses on the environmental factors on learning. According to Hatch (2005), behaviorists break down learning "into manageable segments that adults teach using direct instruction and behavior modification techniques" (p. 8). In order to see if the children are mastering lesson objectives from a behaviorist perspective, there should be an observable difference in their behavior. I could use rewards and punishments to condition the children to act in a certain way, thus ensuring that they have learned something. I would not look at what they do in context because cognitive processes do not matter. Mastery would be strictly defined according to observable behaviors. Can the children do what I have asked or not?

Social cognitive theory is the "theoretical perspective that focuses on how people learn by observing others and how they eventually assume control over their own behavior" (Ormrod, 2011, p. 323). Social cognitive theory came from behaviorist ideas, but incorporates cognitive processes where behaviorism ignores them. How can you tell if students have mastered objectives from a social cognitive perspective? From this perspective, rewards and punishments only work if the children know what they are being rewarded and punished for. I would still use rewards and punishments, but I would emphasize the reasoning behind them. IN this theory, children can learn by watching others. So, if I rewarded one child for doing well, the other children would see it and change their behavior accordingly. In deciding whether or not a child has mastered an objective. I would look at their behavior in context. Why are they doing what they are doing? What are they thinking? This would have a significant effect on whther or not I believe that they have mastered a skill.

References
Hatch, J. A. (2005). Teaching in the New Kindergarten. Canada: Thomson Delmar Learning.
 
Ormrod, J. E. (2011). Educational Psychology: Developing Learners. Boston, MA: Pearson.



3 comments:

  1. While reading your thoughts about social cognitive theory, specifically the example of rewarding a child for doing well and other children observe this and thus change their behavior, I couldn't help but think back to a discussion that took place in our elementary education class tonight about class management. An example of a positive classroom management technique that was presented was for the teacher to only draw attention to positive behaviors that are occurring in the classroom, i.e, if a child is behaving in a positive manner, the teacher would give the child's card a hole punch, and after so many hole punches, the child would receive a reward. By drawing attention to this positive behavior and providing a positive reinforcement, other children may begin to act accordingly to get the same response from the teacher.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I like the way you illustrate the differences. I'll be interested to see how you differentiate SCT from cognitive and constructivist theories.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I particularly liked your remark on looking at a student's behavior in context. There are many mitigating factors for students that may affect performance, and by looking at how they behave in certain situations, you can get closer to understanding why they are behaving as they do.

    ReplyDelete