Title: Evaluating operant conditioning in aiding classroom management

It is still debatable whether operant conditioning is appropriate to apply in classroom

environment despite its frequent use. Trends in classroom management showed that various

types of behavioural modification techniques are used by teachers to increase engagement

(Hanscom, 2010). A lot of educators across the globe use techniques of operant conditioning

in class, whether they realise it or not. Operant conditioning may be defined as an

experimental analysis of behaviour that leads to behaviour change (Staddon & Cerutti, 2003).

It is the act of modifying behaviour based on past consequences. This essay will evaluate the

effectiveness of operant conditioning in aiding classroom management by exploring its

various advantages and disadvantages. In evaluation of application, this essay will target the

age group of fifth-grade students of age 10-12.

Prior to evaluation, techniques of Operant Conditioning may be explained first. Such

techniques are mainly focused on giving reinforcements, whether something good or bad to

either discourage or encourage behaviour. Essentially, it is an act of modifying behaviour

based on its consequences. The reinforcements given may be in form of either rewards or

punishments.

Some may argue that techniques of Operant Conditioning are less suitable for

classroom environment, if the act of conditioning is done on primary level students. One

includes that Operant conditioning do not instil good intrinsic values in children, being that

this method conditions children to act based on future rewards/punishments. Consequently, it

is questionable whether students will continue to do the desired behaviour without the

presence of the stimulus. Kohn mentioned in his study that without incentives, children will

feel less obliged to do the required tasks (Kohn, 1996). Hence, it may be regarded as a not

very good method for teaching children. According Kohlberg’s theory of moral development,
it is stated that during the pre-conventional stage, children perceives what is right and what is

wrong based on the rules and fear of punishment (Olson, 2011). This implies that the moral

reasoning of 10-12 years old children are still developing and not established. Considering

students of age 10-12 are in the pre-conventional stage of moral development, educators need

to plant good morals good habits in children instead of making them dependant of rewards

and punishments.

Secondly, as Operant Conditioning uses techniques that revolve around punishments,

it can also be argued that risks of punishments should be explored. Friedman mentioned

several risks of punishments, which include; Fear, Apathy, and Avoidance behaviour

(Friedman, 2009). Else-Quest, Hyde, & Hejmadi. (2008) have observed the child’s response

to negative interaction in learning maths. Results of observation showed that the children

experienced fear, frustration, then apathy towards math itself. The child’s response in the

study can be said as similar in progression to Friedman’s argument.

In the context of child students, the impacts of these risks can be intensified. For

example, when young children are exposed to a traumatic event, they may learn to associate

fear with the components and context that comes along with the event. This can be referred to

fear-conditioning, where it can lead to psychopathological disorders (including anxiety) as

individuals grow older (Mclaughlin et al., 2016). It is also said that if behavioural apathy is

experienced in childhood, it may develop into depression in the child’s later life (Van Os et

al., 1997, as cited in Hanington, Ramchandani, & Stein, 2010).

Despite the risks it may bring, Operant Conditioning also has its advantages. Firstly,

its techniques can be made simple and costless. For the instance of motivating primary

students, Conditioning may be done by awarding them with sticker rewards or just a simple

praise, and behaviour can be easily modified. A study done by Hoffman et al. found that
elementary school teachers find that verbal reinforcements can increase student engagement

and make them behave in class better than rewards with more materialistic components such

as grades or food (Hoffman et al., 2009).

In the sense of operant conditioning’s simplicity, it can be justified that operant

conditioning may be an easier and a better method of managing a classroom compared to

other classroom management techniques such as antecedent-based prevention. Antecedent-

based preventions refers to strategies that are geared toward prevention of undesirable

behavior. They are strategies put in place beforehand in attempt to reduce behavioural

problems (Cooper et al, 2018). Antecedent-based preventions do not ensure behavioural

change as it is only done before the behaviour is done. It only hopes to prevent children’s

behaviour in the classroom without further guarantee whether the behavioural change will

take place. Operant Conditioning is at an advantage. If techniques of operant conditioning are

done properly (e g. giving the right incentive), it can ensure higher chances of behavioural

change as the focus of the techniques are the consequences.

Secondly, Operant conditioning is also highly effective in aiding common behavioural

problems children project in the classroom. One of the common behaviours include

procrastination. It is said that the norm reaction to homework is procrastination (Steel, 2007,

as cited in Katz, Eilot & Nevo, 2014, p. 1). A research done on fifth grade students measured

their autonomous motivation in response to school tasks such as homeworks (Katz, Eilot &

Nevo, 2014 p. 6). The research concluded that the primary students’ productivity depends on

the value of importance they place on the work, as well as the level of self-efficacy they have

in completing the work. Operant conditioning may be the right tool to aid this common

occurrence. Operant conditioning may increase student motivation by presenting rewards that

are deemed as valuable to the students and it may also increase student’s self-efficacy with

constant praises.
 Lastly, in the context of a classroom, operant conditioning is highly observational and

social. Inevitably, one’s perception of rewards, punishments, and motivation in the classroom

are heavily influenced by other’s standings and the rewards/punishments given to others as

well. Which may lead to the point where getting rewards and avoiding punishments can be

competitive. Competition is a highly effective way to increase learning engagement and

managing behaviour. It is said that competition may spark interests and students’ desire to do

well in school. (Tauer & Harackiewicz, 2004, as cited in Czaja & Cummings, 2009)

Additionally, being that operant conditioning is highly observational and social, it

also promotes vicarious learning. It was discovered in a study that observing others receiving

punishment can result in behavioural change of the observer. (Malouff, Thorsteinsson,

Schutte & Rooke, 2009) In a classroom environment, when a teacher conditions a student

with a punishment or reward, the teacher does not only condition that particular student, but

also the other students who are watching, therefore classroom management can be done more

efficiently.

This essay has evaluated several advantages and disadvantages in applying operant

conditioning as an aid to classroom management for primary students of age 10-12. Overall,

operant conditioning can be a beneficial tool in aiding classroom management because it is

simple, highly effective, and it promotes social aspects of learning, even though the

techniques used such as punishments may have risks, and it also has risks of making learners

dependant on rewards and punishments. In conclusion, operant conditioning can be very

effective in aiding classroom management. Though, the frequency of using punishments and

rewards needs to be controlled so that the risks of punishment and dependency can be

avoided.
 References
Czaja, R. J., & Cummings, R. G. (2009). Designing competitions: How to maintain motivation for losers.
American Journal of Business Education, 2(9), 91-98. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/195901585?accountid=35392
Cooper, J. T., Gage, N. A., Alter, P. J., LaPolla, S., MacSuga-Gage, A. S., & Scott, T. M. (2018). Educators'
self-reported training, use, and perceived effectiveness of evidence-based classroom management
practices. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 62(1), 13.
10.1080/1045988X.2017.1298562

Else-Quest, N. M., Hyde, J. S., & Hejmadi, A. (2008). Mother and child emotions during mathematics
homework. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10(1), 5-35.

Friedman, S. G. (2009). Behavior fundamentals: Filling the behavior-change toolbox. Journal of Applied
Companion Animal Behavior, 3(1), 36–40.
Hanington, L., Ramchandani, P., & Stein, A. (2010). Parental depression and child temperament: Assessing
child to parent effects in a longitudinal population study. Infant Behavior and Development, 33(1), 88-
95.

Hanscom, A. (2010) Effectiveness, types, and usage of behavior modification at the elementary level. Retrieved
from http://rdw.rowan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1101&context=etd
Hoffmann, K. F., Huff, J. D., Patterson, A. S., & Nietfeld, J. L. (2009). Elementary teachers' use and perception
of rewards in the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(6), 843-849.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2008.12.004
Katz, I., Eilot, K., & Nevo, N. (2014). "I'll do it later": Type of motivation, self-efficacy and homework
procrastination. Motivation and Emotion, 38(1), 111-119. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11031-013-
9366-1 (p. 1, 6)
Kohn, A. (1996). By all available means: Cameron and pierce's defense of extrinsic motivators. Review of
Educational Research, 66(1), 1-4. doi:10.2307/1170722
Malouff, J., Thorsteinsson, E., Schutte, N., & Rooke, S. E. (2009). Effects of vicarious punishment: A meta-
analysis. The Journal of General Psychology, 136(3), 271-85. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/213638280?accountid=35392
Mclaughlin, K. A., Sheridan, M. A., Gold, A. L., Duys, A., Lambert, H. K., Peverill, M., . . . Pine, D. S. (2016).
Maltreatment exposure, brain structure, and fear conditioning in children and adolescents.
Neuropsychopharmacology, 41(8), 1956-1964.
http://dx.doi.org.elibrary.jcu.edu.au/10.1038/npp.2015.365
Olson, C. (2011). The deep roots of the fairness committee in Kohlberg’s moral development theory. Schools:
Studies in Education, 8(1), 125-135. 10.1086/659442
Staddon, J. E. R., & Cerutti, D. T. (2003). Operant conditioning. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 115-144.
10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145124