LDT100x Instructional Design and Technology: Learning
Theories
Published: Oct. 9, 2019
This
project asked learners to provide a description of a learning
scenario in which behaviorism is the primary learning theory
that drives the activity.
A Behaviorist Approach to Eliminating Filler Words among Public
Speakers
This
learning scenario focuses on reducing or eliminating "filler
words" ("um," "uh," "so," "like," overuse of "and," and
similar words and utterances) in learners giving speeches and
presentations.
In the learning environment in which this scenario is
situated, behaviorist methods have already been applied with
varying degrees of success. The most widely used method is to
appoint a role-player each time speeches are presented whose
job is to track and publicly report the filler words for each
speaker. This method provides low-level rewards ("you had very
few filler words today") and punishments ("you had quite a
number of filler words today"). This method raises awareness
of behavior but does not go very far in changing it.
Another method is for the role-player to ring a bell or sound
a buzzer every time a speaker utters a filler word. This
method does a bit more to change behavior because the speaker
is embarrassed that his or her filler words cause disruption.
This disruption is a major downside of this approach as it
impairs the flow of each speech and the event in general.
A third method is to collect a "micro-fine," such as (in the
US) a nickel, dime, or quarter for each filler word uttered.
The proceeds are pooled and used toward a fun activity for the
group. This method can also contribute to filler-word
reduction, but the downside is that many people no longer
carry coins.
While the first method provides low-key rewards, the the other
two rely on punishment to eradicate the negative behavior. I
am proposing a behaviorist method that is reward-focused
rather than punishment-focused.
This is a hybrid learning environment in which speeches can be
given face to face or online. Learners, however, supplement
and track their learning online.
For this new method, a phone app would be developed that would
interface with each learner's online learning space. Keramida
(2015, para. 13) notes, "An instructional design for eLearning
based on a behavioristic approach sets the type of reactions
to be received by learners, after interacting with the online
training material." Thus, each learner's learning space must
provide content on filler word and tips for avoiding them in
speech. Using the app during a speaking event, the filler-word
role-player would track each learner's speeches for filler
words, with the total number posting in the learner's learning
space. A reward system is created in which the learner earns a
significant badge for eliminating (or nearly) filler words,
with possible interim awards for reduction in filler-word use.
Those who achieve the top filler-word-elimination badge could
optionally be publicly recognized by all learners in the
learning environment.
This method avoids embarrassing and punishing learners and
does not depend on people carrying coins. It fits with current
practices of motivating and rewarding adult learners with
badges (Finkelstein, Knight, Manning, 2013, July 16); Cole,
Gray, & Martin, n.d; Bowen, 2013; Ady, Kinsella, and
Paynter, 2015; Rayhill, n.d.). "Digital badges," writes Rahill
(n.d.) "are compelling because they offer a meaningful way to
visually recognize learning through a narrative."
Keramida (2013, para. 6) asserts that "objectivism is the key
to remember ... to decide whether a behavioristic approach is
appropriate for your eLearning activities or not." Rather than
ask if a single correct answer exists in this filler-word
scenario, we can ask, "does a single correct behavior exist?"
Arguably, yes. Keramida notes that objective facts don't
change. It's difficult to imagine a scenario in which the
undesirability of filler words in speeches would ever change.
Behaviorism pros and cons:
Pros:
Behaviorism is observable and measurable.
Behaviorism guides learners to pre-established
behavior rather than through mental events (Keramida, 2015,
para. 4)
Behaviorism is suited to certain types of learning
objectives
Cons:
Behaviorism may be overly focused on punishment.
In Behaviorism, knowledge is objective; only one
answer exists (can also be a pro in some cases).
Behaviorism is not workable for "higher-order skills,
such decision-making or problem-solving through analysis,
synthesis or evaluation" (Keramida, 2015, para. 5).