Can Physics Education Research Learn a Lot From Operant Conditioning?

Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “Can Physics Education Research Learn a Lot From Operant Conditioning?” [Hake (2012)]. The abstract reads:

**************************************************
ABSTRACT: PhysLrnR’s Diana Kornbrot wrote that “Behaviourism, a la Skinner, questions the usefulness of inferred mental states as an explanatory concept - this has proved a dead-end.”

To which Bud Nye responded]:

“But, behavioral treatments have a strong, extremely well documented history of effectiveness in psychotherapy and learning. The applied behavior analysis research support of behavioral methods is massive, of extremely high quality, and compelling."

And Diana Kornbrot in a later post wrote [my inserts at ". . . . .[[insert]]. . . . . . . . . Skinner. . . . .[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._F._Skinner]]. . . made many contributions and his work on operant conditioning is invaluable and makes a strong contributions to this day. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy . . . . .[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_behavioral_therapy]]. . . .. is one of those strong contributions . . . Indeed Physics Education Research (PER) CAN LEARN A LOT FROM OPERANT CONDITIONING since rote learning also has a part to play in learning complex ideas. But the 'responses' that are being reinforced are not merely physical. They may well be verbal responses about the client's mental state.”

I quote (with permission) comments I received from Julie Vargas, daughter of B.F. Skinner, in response to my posts “Could ‘Precision Teaching’ and the Wider Education Communities Learn Something From One Another?” at http://bit.ly/iA8mpj and http://bit.ly/ldcizH. Vargas's comments appear to be consistent with the above opinion of Nye. She wrote [my inserts at “. . . .[[insert]]. . . .”; my CAPS]:

“In Behavior Analysis for Effective Teaching (Vargas, 2009) I quote [Eric Mazur]. What I didn't know was that his work was being touted as 'constructivist-oriented' 'Interactive Engagement.' I don't see . . . . [[Mazur's method, see e.g., his YouTube talk at http://bit.ly/dBYsXh]]. . . . as like Direct Instruction. . . . . . There is no choral responding. . . . . . I'm not sure [Mazur's method] is like Precision Teaching either. . . . . . . . .[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_teaching]]. . . . . I didn't see any fluency exercises, nor student graphing. But [MAZUR'S METHOD] IS DEFINITELY BEHAVIORAL in asking for student responding, adjusting according to how they do answer, and in the objectives being stated in clear terms that require 'applying' the principles to every day life in addition to just memorizing them.”
**************************************************

To access the complete 10 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/yrvMaM.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake
Twitter https://twitter.com/#!/rrhake

“People have nowadays . . . got a strange opinion that everything should be taught by lectures. Now, I cannot see that lectures can do so much good as reading the books from which the lectures are taken. Lectures were once useful; but now, when we can all read, and books are so numerous, lectures are unnecessary.”
Samuel Johnson according to James Boswell (1791)


REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 06 March 2012.]
Boswell, J. 1791. Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D, online at http://bit.ly/qfDXPz.

Hake, R.R. 2012. “Can Physics Education Research Learn a Lot From Operant Conditioning?” on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/yrvMaM. Post of 10 Mar 2012 09:43:20-0800 AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists. This post erroneously attributes Diana Kronbrot's statement "Physics Education Research (PER) CAN LEARN A LOT FROM OPERANT CONDITIONING" to Bud Nye : - ( .

Vargas, J. 2009. Behavior Analysis for Effective Teaching. Routledge, publisher’s information at http://bit.ly/lTonxZ. Amazon.com information at http://amzn.to/iPiNwd, note the searchable “Look Inside” feature- some might be interested in the results of a search for “Mazur.”

Research on the Extent of Active Learning - Merbitz's PSI Plug

Some blog followers might be interested in “Research on the Extent of Active Learning – Merbitz’s PSI Plug” [Hake (2011b)]. The abstract reads:

*************************************************
ABSTRACT: In “Re: Research on the Extent of Active Learning” [Hake (2011a)] at http://bit.ly/u63GbO, I stated “the glacial inertia of the educational system, though not well understood, appears to be typical of the slow Diffusion of Innovations [Rogers (2003)] in human society.”

SClistserv's Chuck Merbitz (2011) responded (paraphrasing): “I'm not surprised at the glacial pace or the burial of innovations: 20 years ago Sherman (1992) reviewed the ‘Personalized System of Instruction (PSI)’ a highly effective innovation published most famously 43 years ago by psychologist Fred S. Keller (1968) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_S._Keller in 'Goodbye, teacher....' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In her book Mastery Learning in the Science Classroom: Success for Every Student, Kelly Morgan (2011)] speculates that PSI is not widely used because *its very success at teaching students was a factor in its abandonment* - it upsets the social structure when too many learners master the material, a finding that has been replicated in the precision teaching world http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_teaching. . . . .[[My Insert: “and in the physics education world http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_education”]]. . . . ."

For another take on the demise of PSI see “The rise and fall of PSI physics at MIT” [Friedman et al. (1976)] at http://bit.ly/vMlEdD. For the burial of innovations see, e.g., “Re: Interactive Engagement Has Many Forms” [Hake (2005] at http://bit.ly/voy3vd.
*************************************************

To access the complete 17 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/sD6S9f.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References
which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)

rrhake@earthlink.net
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to SDI Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
Academia: http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake


“And it ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain of success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. This coolness arises partly from fear of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not readily believe in new things until they have had a long experience with them. Thus it happens that whenever those who are hostile have the opportunity to attack they do it like partisans, whilst the others defend lukewarmly....”
Machiavelli (The Prince, 1515)

“The PRIMA FACIE AFFRONT: Whereas I have spent a significant fraction of my professional life perfecting my lectures and otherwise investing conscientiously in the status quo, therefore to suggest an alternative is, by definition, to attack me.”
Halfman et al. (1977)

REFERENCES [All URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 6 Dec 2011.]
Hake, R.R. 2011a. “Re: Research on the Extent of Active Learning,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/u63GbO. Post of 4 Dec 2011 19:01:51-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post were transmitted to several discussion lists and are also on my blog “Hake'sEdStuff” at http://bit.ly/tMRRqi with a provision for comments.

Hake, R.R. 2011b. “Research on the Extent of Active Learning – Merbitz’s PSI Plug” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/sD6S9f. Post of 6 Dec 2011 15:09:34-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.

Halfman, R., M. L.A. MacVicar, W.T. Martin, E.F. Taylor, & J.R. Zacharias. 1977. “Tactics for Change.” MIT Occasional Paper No. 11; online at http://bit.ly/s8z5xL. Thanks to John Belcher for placing this gem on the web.

Machiavelli, N. 1515. The Prince, translated by W.K. Marriott, online at http://bit.ly/vXOWVU thanks to the Constitution Society.

Re: "How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School"

Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post of the above title. The abstract reads:

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

ABSTRACT - GS Candy of the Math-Teach list wrote: "I've now read through quite sizable portions of . . . . . How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School. . . . .[[Branford et al. (2000)]] . . . . I believe most of the book's findings and recommendations do not square with the philosophy of the Robert Hansen-Wayne Bishop school of thought regarding the teaching or learning of math. The book will serve as an excellent model for the effective teaching and learning of math - or of any other discipline, for that matter . . . . . I shall be using it as a primary reference for all my own work."

Bransford et al. (2000) have to this to say about behaviorism: "A limitation of early behaviorism stemmed from its focus on observable stimulus conditions and the behaviors associated with those conditions. This orientation made it difficult to study such phenomena as understanding, reasoning, and thinking-phenomena that are of paramount importance for education. Over time, radical behaviorism. . . . . gave way to a more moderate form of behaviorism. . . . that preserved the scientific rigor of using behavior as data, but also allowed hypotheses about internal 'mental' states when these became necessary to explain various phenomena. . . . In the late 1950s, the complexity of understanding humans and their environments became increasingly apparent, and a new field emerged - cognitive science. From its inception, cognitive science approached learning from a multidisciplinary perspective that included anthropology, linguistics, philosophy, developmental psychology, computer science, neuroscience, and several branches of psychology. . . . . . New experimental tools, methodologies, and ways of postulating theories made it possible for scientists to begin serious study of mental functioning: to test their theories rather than simply speculate about thinking and learning and, in recent years, to develop insights into the importance of the social and cultural contexts of learning. The introduction of rigorous qualitative research methodologies have provided perspectives on learning that complement and enrich the experimental research traditions."

What's behaviorism got to do with math education? I used to think that math warrior Wayne Bishop's "Mathematically Correct" http://mathematicallycorrect.com/science.htm school of "direct instruction," was a manifestation of behaviorism. But lately I've come to realize that "Precision Teaching," an exemplar of one school of behaviorism, may not be all bad - more than can be said for "Mathematically Correct."

Math-Teach subscribers, who, like Chandy, think Bransford et al. might "serve as an excellent model for the effective teaching and learning of math" might consider subscribing to PhysLrnR, where "Bransford" is more commonly mentioned than on Math-Teach.

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

To access the complete 17 kB post please click on http://tinyurl.com/yahogu5 .

REFERENCES [Tiny URL’s courtesy http://tinyurl.com/create.php .]

Bransford, J.D., A.L. Brown, R.R. Cocking, eds. 2000. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School. Nat. Acad. Press; the entire book (with a search engine) is online at http://tinyurl.com/apbgf !

Hake, R.R. 2010. "Re: How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School," online at the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://tinyurl.com/yahogu5 . Post of 1 Apr 2010 20:38:44-0700 to AERA-L, Math-Teach, and Net-Gold. The abstract and a link to the complete post are being distributed to various discussion lists.

Re: Could 'Precision Teaching' and the Wider Education Communities Learn Something From One Another?

Some blog followers might be interested in a post titled “Re: Could 'Precision Teaching' and the Wider Education Communities Learn Something From One Another? “[Hake (2010b)]. The abstract reads:

########################################

ABSTRACT: Julie Vargas, daughter of B.F. Skinner and President of the B.F. Skinner Foundation http://www.bfskinner.org/BFSkinner/Home.html , commented on my post “Could 'Precision Teaching' and the Wider Education Communities Learn Something From One Another?" [Hake (2010a)] as follows (quoted with permission; my insert at “. . . .[[insert]]. . . .”):

1. [In “Behavior Analysis for Effective Teaching ” (Vargas, 2009)] I quote [Eric Mazur]. . . . . . What I didn't know was that his work was being touted as "constructivist-oriented” "Interactive Engagement."

2. I don't see [Mazur's] work as like Direct Instruction. . . . [[in this post I give various conflicting meanings of the vague term “direct instruction"]]. . . . As described in his book he just poses practical multiple-choice questions following a mini-lecture (usually a third of the lecture hour) students first answer and then discuss among themselves and answer again as he walks around listening to their explanations. There is no choral responding.

3. I'm not sure [Mazur's method] is like Precision Teaching either. I didn't see any fluency exercises, nor student graphing.

4. But [Mazur's method] is definitely BEHAVIORAL in asking for student responding, adjusting according to how they do answer, and in the objectives being stated in clear terms that require "applying" the principles to every day life in addition to just memorizing them.

To access the complete 18 kB post, please click on http://tinyurl.com/y8mnz8n .

REFERENCES [Tiny URL's courtesy http://tinyurl.com/create.php .]

Hake. R.R. 2010a. “Could 'Precision Teaching' and the Wider Education Communities Learn Something From One Another?" online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://tinyurl.com/ye5rrnq . Post of 25 Mar 2010 11:47:54-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract was also sent to various discussion lists and is online at http://hakesedstuff.blogspot.com/2010/03/could-precision-teaching-and-wider.html with a provision for comments.

Hake. R.R. 2010b. “Re: Could 'Precision Teaching' and the Wider Education Communities Learn Something From One Another?" online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://tinyurl.com/y8mnz8n . Post of 31 Mar 2010 09:54:24 -0700 to AERA-L Net-Gold, and SClistserv. The abstract is also being sent to various discussion lists.

Vargas, J. 2009. Behavior Analysis for Effective Teaching. Routledge, publisher's information at http://tinyurl.com/yzbzurp . Amazon.com information at http://tinyurl.com/yc8hz2y. Note the searchable “Look Inside” feature. An expurgated “Google Book Preview” is online at http://tinyurl.com/yh7lpxk . Vargas discusses the following aspects of the semi-log “Standard Celeration” chart” (SCchart) of “counts” vs time (use the “>” at the top of the page to scroll through the pages): (a) Lindsley's development of “Precision Teaching” and the SCchart on pages 126 and 127; (b) “counts” as a measure of behavior at the top of page 103; (c) interpretation of the SCchart on page 132. If I understand the “Standard Celeration” chart correctly (please correct me if I'm wrong) it's essentially the behavorists' version of a kinematics semilog plot of speed (time rate of change of position) “v” vs time “t”. Hence “Celeration” from the “celeration” part of the kinematics “acceleration.”

Could 'Precision Teaching' and the Wider Education Community Learn Something From One Another?

Some blog followers might be interested in a post titled “Could ‘Precision Teaching’ and the Wider Education Community Learn Something From One Another.”

The abstract reads:

############################

ABSTRACT: In response to “Re: Confessions of a Converted Lecturer #2” [Hake (2010b)], Joshua Garner (2010) of the behaviorist-oriented “Precision Teaching” SClistserv list wrote: “By applying simple behavioral psychology principles in a college physics class student performance increased. . . . duh. . . . by the end of the video I said to myself, 'Gee this guy is using direct instruction and active student responding (in an around-about way)’. ”

But, the wider education community generally regards Mazur's approach as the constructivist-oriented “Interactive Engagement,” loosely speaking, the polar opposite of “direct instruction.”

The insularity of education research was further demonstrated by SClistserv's J.W. Eshleman (2010) who, responding to “Re: Confessions of a Converted Lecturer #5” [Hake (2010c)], referenced three methods to measure and enhance the degree of student learning in a “lecture,” all developed *within* the Precision Teaching Community (PTC), ignoring such methods developed *outside* the PTC - over 30 such are discussed in the double-asterisked references to this post.

Considering the Garner and Eshleman posts, could the "Precision Teaching" and wider education communities learn something from one another?

############################

To access the complete 35 kB post please click on http://tinyurl.com/ye5rrnq .

REFERENCES [Tiny URL's courtesy http://tinyurl.com/create.php .]

Eshleman, J.W. 2010. “Re: Confessions of a Converted Lecturer #5,” SClistserv post of 22 Mar 2010 14:16:47-0400. Online on the OPEN! SClistserv archives at . SClistserv is short for “Precision Teaching/Standard Celeration Charting.” The masthead at the archives http://tinyurl.com/y8twxf6 reads: “The Standard Celeration listserve (SClistserv) came about to serve all people interested in precision teaching (PT) and standard celeration charting. . . . . . .” As indicated in Hake (2007), Ogden Lindsley (1991, 1992), a disciple of B.F. Skinner, is evidently the founder of “Precision Teaching” and inventor of the “Standard Celeration” chart (SCchart). For other references see Fluency.org http://www.fluency.org/ ; “Precision Teaching Hub and Wiki Blog” [Claypool-Frey (2010)l; “Precision Teaching and Standard Celeration Charting” [Kubina 2010); and the Standard Celeration Society [SCC (2010)]. For a good set of references see Clayton et al. (2007). For related books see e.g., Gardner et al. (1994), Heward et al. (2004), Heward (2008), Johnston & Pennypacker (2008), & Vargas (2009). Vargas (2009) discusses (a) Lindsley's development of “Precision Teaching” and the SCchart; (b) “counts” as a measure of behavior; and (c) interpretation of the SCchart.

Garner, J. 2010. “Re: Confessions of a Converted Lecturer #2,” SClistserv post of 20 Mar 2010 18:54:50-0700; online on the OPEN! SClistserv archives at http://tinyurl.com/y8o6mge.

Hake. R.R. 2010, “Could 'Precision Teaching' and the Wider Education Communities Learn Something From One Another?" online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://tinyurl.com/ye5rrnq. Post of 25 Mar 2010 11:47:54-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract is also being sent to various discussion lists.