Donate now

Privacy Policy

Protection of privacy is our first concern, and SQE does not sell or trade information provided by its subscribers or supporters. Your information is used to process donations and newsletter subscriptions, and to contact you about upcoming publications and events.

feed iconRSS Feed

Follow Us
Follow SQESocQualEd
on Twitter

Please note Downloads require you to have the Adobe Reader installed, you can get it here for free Adobe.com

 

 
 
Society for Quality Education

Subscribe to our mailing list

Tips from a master teacher

August 01, 2011 by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) at 08:05 AM

I am reading a fascinating book, Teaching Needy Kids in Our Backward System: 42 years of trying, by Siegfried Engelmann, which I will review in due course, but I decided to post this long-but-worth-it excerpt (pp. 204-205), for two reasons: the author is writing about a couple of experiences he had in Canada (at Thistletown near Toronto and Bellevue, ON) and he provides powerful insights on teaching autistic children and training dogs.

"I explained that there are two ways to work effectively with these [autistic] children. One is ponderous, to plow through the program. The other is to trick the learner. To illustrate the trick technique, I asked the teacher to name some objects the child could not reliably identify. She listed six things, including a watch, a ring, a book, and a pencil. We got examples of al six objects from the teacher and people in the audience and put them on a table. Then I worked with the child. I did not review or even say the names of any of the objects on the table. I presumed that he actually knew the names of these objects. I tested that presumption with tasks that emphasized something other than the object name.

"For the first task, I pointed to a woman in the front row and said, 'You're going to give something to that person right there. Look at her.' I told the woman to raise her hand. 'That's the person, right there. Listen: give the watch to that person. That one, right there.'

"The child picked up the watch and gave it to a man sitting three seats from the woman.

"I did the same thing with all the other objects. For each task, the child picked up the object I named incidentally and gave it to the wrong person. I pointed out that he did know the names of these objects in some form but he didn't know how to mobilize his knowledge or link it to tasks that required him to focus attention on that object and the relationship of object to name. (If I had changed the task so that I acted as if the name of the object was important, and the person in the audience was secondary, the child would have picked up the wrong object and given it to the right person.) The child's problem was not one of compliance but of not being able to control his attention. When he attempted to attend to something he experienced something like a blind spot. Things on the periphery were clear, but the thing he tried to attend to wasn't accessible.

"The point was that the child needed work in plowing through the program so that he learned how to mobilize attention. At the same time, there were ways to accelerate the child or correct mistakes that did not involve repetition, but trickery. I demonstrated with a second child. For this one, I acted as if I was very concerned with his hands, which moved nervously. I kept reminding him to hold his hands down by his sides. I reinforced him for this behavior, and presented tasks from the language lesson with no particular reinforcement as if I was interested in his hands, not the tasks from the program. I made frequent comments about his hands. He performed flawlessly on material that he hadn't been able to do when the teacher had demonstrated with him. I skipped far ahead in the program. He performed flawlessly.

"I combined trips to Thistletown with some work in Bellevue, Ontario, where I worked with first graders. After work one day, we went to a teacher's house for a social get-together. The teacher had a large, playful German shorthaired pointer. One of the guests tossed a small pillow across the room and the dog retrieved it but woulnd't let go. When the man tried to wrest it from the dog, the dog hung on, hunkered down, growled, and apparently thought this was the best part of the game.

"The dog's master said, 'It's no use. We tried everything, and we can't get him to let go of whatever he fetches.' He listed some of the things they had tried - twisting his ear, swatting his butt. 'Nothing works.'

"One of the guests said, 'I'll bet Ziggy could teach him to let go in three trials.'

"I said, 'I don't know. I think it would take four.' (This was after a couple of drinks and my confidence level was high.)

"At the time, I didn't smoke, but I knew from when I had smoked that dogs do not like it if you blow smoke in their face. So I lit up a cigarette and threw the pillow. The dog fetched and returned to me for the wrestling match. I grabbed the pillow, and he started his routine. I took a long drag from the cigarette, said, 'Drop it,', bent over, and blew smoke at the dog's snout. The dog let go of the pillow and vigorously turned his head away.

"I did the same thing on the second trial - said 'Drop it,' bent over, blew smoke.

"On the third trial, the dog let go of the pillow as I was bending over, before I blew smoke.

"On the fourth trial, I said 'Drop it.' Before I started to bend, the dog let go."

Share this article

Comments

I love the dog story.  It is a lovely example of B.F. Skinner’s Behaviorism using ‘negative reinforcement’, and would certainly be a refreshing change from our current child-centered, constructivist techniques.

Skinner had great success in training pigeons with this method. Perhaps we could apply Skinner’s pigeon experience to help a child who has, for example, an aversion to algebra. 

We would put that child in a cage, and reduce his feed until he reaches 75% of his normal body weight.  Then we pull him out, and offer him a really simple algebra equation - perhaps ‘1 + 1 = ?’. 

If he gets it right, we give him a party sandwich. Then repeat while gently increasingly the difficulty of the questions.  Eventually, the child would be full, and we would send him back in his cage.

24 hours later, we would pull him out again.  I’m thinking that this ‘reluctant’ child will hit the ground LOOKING for algebra problems to solve.

————

It’s not all funny.  We don’t teach Behaviorism to teachers because we consider Skinner’s techniques to be ‘training’ rather than ‘teaching’.  But Behaviorism works (as Englemann’s dog demonstrates), and it works whether we use it properly or not - or whether we even realize that we are using it.

And so we use it inadvertently, unthinkingly, incorrectly, and with unexpected results.  We don’t match the behavior with the reinforcer, or schedule the reinforcements.  We even create learning problems - perhaps we wrongly reinforce a child who tries a hard problem and fails (“No, that’s not right - who else wants to try”), ensuring that he won’t try again.

Posted by Tom on 08/01 at 02:16 PM

Tom to your comments - “And so we use it inadvertently, unthinkingly, incorrectly, and with unexpected results.  We don?t match the behavior with the reinforcer, or schedule the reinforcements.  We even create learning problems - perhaps we wrongly reinforce a child who tries a hard problem and fails (?No, that?s not right - who else wants to try?), ensuring that he won?t try again.”

How about rewarding students in reading a certain number of books, answering the questions correctly, and receiving points. For those that do not received a certain amount of points, they will remain in the classroom to do further work on building their reading strategies. Outcome in my corner of the world, parents withdrew the kids for a free afternoon at home,  who were rewarded with the negative consequence of further lessons on reading strategies, and eventually the kids who enjoyed the movies, the parents withdrew their children as well. As a result, only a few students showed up in the afternoon, and this practice was dropped within three years.

It is not funny at all being the receiving end of the negative consequence regarding the skills of reading and comprehension, and I believe that the parents did the correct thing by withdrawing their children for the afternoon. As one parent pointed out to me, why bother to show up, when there is no attempt to change the practices that results in failure for some children. As for the parents whose children got to see the movies, they withdrew because they was no learning taking place, and why not take advantage of a unplanned afternoon escape from the school.

Posted by Nancy on 08/01 at 06:42 PM

Leave A Comment

Be polite and respectful. Stay on-topic. State your position clearly and write succinctly. Provide support for claims. Don't hog the microphone. Strong opinions are OK, but outrage is not. Don't post just to upset others.

Name:

Email (required but not displayed):

Emotions

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below: