Behavioral Systems Family of Models

Candice Clark

Research Paper submitted for

CI 703 Theories, Models, and Research of Teaching
at Marshall University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

Doctor of Education
In
Curriculum and Instruction

Ron Childress EdD. Professor

Graduate School of Education and Professional Development

South Charleston, WV
2014

Keywords: Direct Instruction, Mastery Learning, Simulations, Programmed Instruction,

Behaviorism

1
 Introduction
The behavioral system has its beginnings and foundation in psychology and behavioral

theory. Variables in the environment have an effect on peoples’ behavior. They will either

perform or avoid a behavior depending on their response to the variable. Educators can use this

knowledge to design instruction, create materials, and plan activities to foster learning.

Behaviorists contend this theory is not about controlling people but rather encouraging self-

control.

Behavioral models of learning and instruction are based on the works of Pavlov,

Thorndike, and Watson and Rayner. Pavlov’s famous work with dogs demonstrated how

stimulus could produce a response through the use of a condition stimulus (Nesbitt, 2013).

Watson and Rayner were able to extend Pavlov’s work to humans with their famous experiment

with Albert demonstrating that classical conditioning would work with human beings (Nesbitt,

2013). Skinner's work explored behavioral ideas in education. Behavioral theory focused on

observable behaviors and contends that with time and the right environment, all people can learn.

Skinner was interested in contributing to the field of education and had a great impact on

education. Skinner proposed that by bringing students’ behavior under control by reinforcing

desired behaviors, students were more easily taught. Skinner also expressed that students must

be active learners, not passive ("B.F. Skinner," n.d.). He also felt that teachers must be taught

more effective ways of teaching (“B.F. Skinner,” n.d.).

In the late 1950’s, behavioral techniques became popular in schools. Teachers began

using contingency management and programmed learning with great success (Kalanilayam,

2009). Over the last decades, research has shown this family of models to be effective. The

2
techniques have been applied to a wide variety of issues from phobias, to social skills problems,

to learning problems (Kalanilayam, 2009).

One of the models in the behavioral family is mastery learning. Many models of mastery

learning are based on Bloom’s Learning for Mastery model (Guskey & Gates, 1986). Bloom’s

Learning for Mastery model proposes defined learning objectives, regular checks of student

learning and immediate feedback, and criterion based evaluations (Guskey & Gates, 1986).

Mastery learning shares many of these characteristics with Bloom’s model. Mastery learning

involves teaching a concept until the skill is mastered. These types of programs employ

programmed instruction, self-instructional programs that demonstrates a system of immediate

reinforcement and annulus control. The basic components are: sequence of items that a student

has to respond to, students response to whether it be filling in a blank, selecting from a series of

answers, solving a problem, as well as immediate feedback to the response.

Direct instruction, another model based on behavioral theories, guides learning to

perform certain behaviors through task definition and task analysis. The learner tasks are broken

down into smaller tasks creating teaching that allows mastery. Next, the teacher presents the

learning situation in its entirety in order to allow the transference of previous learning. Direct

instruction focuses on teacher direction and control, expectations for student excellence, focus on

the assignment completion, and academics. The teacher selects the tasks and set up the classroom

for positive behavior that encourages active engagement for students.

The behavioral systems models have their basis in a long history of research and

experimentation by psychologists. These psychologists sought to understand human behavior

and the motivations as well as how humans learn and how learning can be influenced by the

environment. As with all models of instruction, the behavioral systems family does not fit every

3
teaching and learning situation nor does it fit every student, but the vast research on the models

demonstrates the successful possibilities.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to explore the Behavioral Systems Family models of teaching

and investigate the applicability to the classroom. This study will examine the basic goals and

concepts of these models. This study will consist of a literature review focused on defining the

models and summarizing the literature on the effectiveness of these models. Strengths and

weaknesses of these teaching models will be considered along with an analysis of how these

models are applicable in my experience.

Questions
1. What are the goals of the Behavioral Systems Family models of teaching?

2. What does the research indicate with regard to the effectiveness of these models of

teaching?

3. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the Behavioral Systems Family models of

teaching?

4. Are the Behavioral Systems Family models applicable to my teaching experience?

Delimitations
This paper presents a literature review regarding the Behavioral Systems Family Models

of teaching. There is only a discussion of the research and a synthesis of key concepts. The

research reviewed included literature defining the Behavioral Systems Family models, the major

contributors of these models, the strengths and weaknesses in these models, and the effectiveness

of these models. This research did not involve any experiment or attempt to apply the models to

a real world classroom due to limits on time.

4
 Significance of the Study
This study will extend the understanding of the Behavioral Systems Family Models of

teaching by synthesizing research and explaining how the models could be applied to an average,

modern classroom. Although research is well known to many in education, many in education

have negative views of these models. Educators need to explore a variety of teaching models to

facilitate the development of a variety of teaching strategies and methods.

Methods
The literature was plentiful for the Behavioral Systems Family Models of teaching. I

found articles by searching the ERIC and Ebscohost databases. The literature on these models

appeared in educational, counseling, and psychology journals. There were also websites

dedicated to the major proponents of behaviorism and their experiments.

Review of the Literature

Direct instruction is a popular instructional model in the Behavioral Systems Models that

has a long history in education. Developed by Siegfried Engelmann in the 60’s, direct

instruction is sometimes referred to as “teacher proof” due to its use of teaching scripts ("Direct

Instruction," 2011). Along with scripted lesson plans, direct instruction features signals to let

students know when to respond, focus on skills, frequent questioning, and feedback. The goal of

direct instruction is to encourage student learning as well as increasing the quality of learning

(Stein, Carnine, & Dixon, 1998). According to Stein et al, (1998) direct instruction does this

through teaching critical background knowledge students missed and connecting this knowledge

to new knowledge. A common mistake many make about direct instruction is assuming that it is

a lecture approach. Direct instruction is focused on the interaction between teachers and students

(Magliaro, Lockee, & Burton, 2005). Direct instruction begins with the teacher identifying the

5
overarching goals and tasks student need to learn then the teacher breaks those tasks down into

smaller tasks, creating activities that help students master those tasks, and then presenting

activities that allow students to demonstrate their newly gained knowledge (Magliaro et al,

2005). The teacher achieves these steps by creating an environment that employs on task student

behavior and maintains student attention. There have been a variety of models that have been

created after the direct instruction model due to its very successful history.

Mastery learning is another method in the Behavioral Systems family. Mastery learning

presents subject matter in steps allowing students to master a step before moving on to the next

step in learning ("Mastery Learning," 2007). Students who do not reach mastery receive

remediation from tutoring, working with peers, small group work, or additional assignments

("Mastery Learning," 2007). Students receive extra time to work on material until they are able

to demonstrate mastery.

The underlying theory of mastery learning is that all students can learn if given the

opportunity and time. This theory assumes that any teacher can help any student learn

successfully (Block, 1980). Throughout the lessons, students are given feedback about what they

are doing well and what they need to improve upon. Mastery learning is different from what

occurs usually in classrooms. According to Robinson (1992), “traditional instruction holds time

constant and allows mastery to vary while mastery learning or systematic instruction holds

mastery constant and allows time to vary.”

Mastery learning begins with clear objectives of what is to be taught and what is to be

learned. The subject matter is divided into small units each with defined objectives, a pretest,

learning materials and teaching strategies, and formative and summative assessments ("Mastery

Learning," 2007). Formative assessments are used to determine which students may need

6
remediation and the summative assessment is used to evaluate mastery. Formative assessment

and feedback requires criterion referenced grading which means that student learning is judged

against predetermined goals and standards rather than judging student learning against other

students’ learning (Lalley & Gentile, 2009). Mastery learning offers the necessary time for all

students to learn and master the material. The units end with an assessment to ensure all

objectives have been reached ("Mastery Learning," 2007).

Mastery learning is a set of individualized instructional practices that help students learn

(Block, 1980). Some lessons are set up as group based and teacher directed in which students

work cooperatively with classmates and the teacher leads the information and the manner by

which it is delivered (Block, 1980). According to Block (1980), other lessons are student paced

and individually focused where students will learn independently. The students control the

information and its delivery.

Mastery learning also has a component for addressing students who demonstrate mastery

early while others are still working through remediation. Students who master quickly are

offered enrichment activities and are helping tutor other students (Lalley & Gentile, 2009). This

encourages students to not only master a subject, but to excel in a subject.

Another method of instruction in the Behavioral Systems Family is simulations. A

simulation is an instructional technique that presents meaningful activities and situations through

computer based instruction ("Simulations," 2013). Simulations provide virtual experiments

where learning tasks can be experienced multiple times. This technique replaces real

experiences with guided experiences that are immersive and interactive (Lateef, 2010).

7
 Conclusions
The goals of direct instruction are to use face to face learning and promote on task

student behavior while encouraging persistence. The goals of mastery learning are to teach all

students using effective practice. The goal of simulations is to offer real world experiences

without risk in order for students to learn. All models in the behavioral systems family propose

that most students can achieve an acceptable level of learning.

These models have decades of research that indicating they are sound, effective methods

for teaching most students. Research indicates that direct instruction increases time on task for

students, important skills learned, and high rates of student success (Magliaro et al, 2005). Few

models have been as thoroughly or extensively researched as direct instruction. The largest

educational research project conducted compared direct instruction with 12 other models over

the course of 30 years and included 75,000 students at 180 sites (Magliaro et al, 2005). This

study concluded that direct instruction is effective and more successful than the other models in

student engagement and achievement (Magliaro et al, 2005).

Strengths and Weaknesses

The strengths of direct instruction are both beneficial to teachers and students. The use of

scripted lessons allows the teacher to focus: on presenting the material to students, students’

skills required for their success at learning new skills, potential problems through task analysis,

how the students learn, and how to construct carefully crafted tasks for students (Magliaro, et al,

2005). The benefits for the students is the increase in self-esteem and confidence as they

successful learn.

One of the weaknesses in this model is the time commitment, the model must be

implemented for a year in order to see the benefits, according to Magliaro et al (2005). Another

8
often cited weakness is the inflexibility of the model. Direct instruction has a strict procedure

that some feel may inhibit teacher creativity (Markusic, 2012). Teachers must also be well

prepared and have a solid grasp of subject matter in order for successful implementation of direct

instruction (Markusic, 2012).

The strengths of mastery learning lie in the philosophy that all students can learn given

enough time and opportunity. Mastery learning is designed to allow everyone to learn at his or

her own pace. If students are not forced to move on to other material before mastering a skill,

they are less likely to become frustrated and tune out. Students learn when they are ready.

The weakness of mastery learning is the amount of time needed. Ideally, no one would

have to move forward on material until they had mastered the current lesson. Unfortunately,

many teachers are on a time schedule and have to move on. The other weakness concerning time

and mastery learning is what to do with the students who master skills quickly and have to wait

on other students. If this method of teaching is not implemented correctly, some kids will be

wasting time on meaningless busy work while waiting on the slower students to catch up.

Another weakness with mastery learning is that breaking up an objective into small pieces can

lead to fractured and boring learning that becomes meaningless (Wiggins, 2014). Some contend

that the idea of mastery is flawed, and ask what is mastery? How does the teacher know what

mastery is for each student?

The strengths in simulations based instruction is that students experience real world

situations and learn practical applications without the risks related. Students are able to explore

situations in the safety of their classroom. Another strength is the cost. Simulations are an

inexpensive way to expose students to activities they would not be able to do within the financial

9
constraints of the schools or families. A simulation could allow students to see the bottom of the

ocean whereas few school districts would be able to afford such a field trip.

The Behavioral Systems Family of models apply to my teaching experience because of

the underlying philosophy that most students can learn in the right environment. As a special

educator, I know most students can learn despite learning difficulties if they learning

environment is set up to allow for learner differences. It was no surprise to me that direct

instruction had its origins in instructing disadvantaged students. It is a common practice among

special educators to break broad objectives down into small units. In a resource classroom with

its maximum number of 12 students, allows teachers to focus on students still working on

mastering a skill while facilitating enrichment activities for the students that have mastered the

skills. It would be more difficult for a general education classroom teacher with 30 students to

fully implement mastery learning.

Implications
Behavioral Systems Family of models have not maintained their popularity as education

has moved back toward a learner centered philosophy. However, these models are efficient and

successful methods for teaching students and will continue to create successful learning

experiences in schools and classrooms throughout the world. As the focus on standardized

testing and standards based learning increases, models such as mastery learning and direct

instruction may become more popular in the classroom as teachers endeavor to teach specific

tasks and discrete skills. The lesson delivery method may look very different from the traditional

idea of the teacher lecturer. For example, instruction may come from a computer program or

website rather than from the teacher. Immediate feedback may come in the form of clickers or

10
texted responses from the teacher. Advances in technology may allow for more efficient and

personalized manners of implementation (Magliaro, Lockee, & Burton, 2005).

11
 References
Beginnings. (n.d.). Retrieved March 16, 2014, from http://www.nifdi.org/research/history-of-di-

research/beginnings

B.F. Skinner. (n.d.). Retrieved April 02, 2014, from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._F._Skinner#Theory

Block, J. H. (1980). Promoting excellence through mastery learning. Theory Into Practice, 19(1),

66-74. doi: 10.1080/00405848009542874

Direct instruction. (2011, June 6). Retrieved March 16, 2014, from

http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Direct_instruction

Engelmann, S. (1999). The benefits of direct instruction: Affirmative action for at-risk students.

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 57(1), 77-79.

Guskey, T. R., & Gates, S. L. (1986). Synthesis of research on the effects of mastery learning in

elementary and secondary classrooms. Educational Leadership, 43(8), 73-80.

Guskey, T. R., & Jung, L. A. (2011). Response to intervention and mastery learning: Tracing

roots and seeking common ground. The Clearing House, 84, 249-255. doi:

10.1080/00098655.2011.590551

Kalanilayam, S. (2009, March 21). Educational technology for all [Web log post]. Retrieved

from http://sathitech.blogspot.com/2009/03/teaching-and-learning-models.html

Lateef, F. (2010). Simulation-based learning: Just like the real thing. Journal of Emergencies,

Trauma, and Shock, 3(4), 348. doi: 10.4103/0974-2700.70743

Magliaro, S. G., Lockee, B. B., & Burton, J. K. (2005). Direct instruction revisited: A key model

for instructional technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4),

41-55. doi: 10.1007/BF02504684

12
Markusic, M. (2012, January 06). Some Advantages & Disadvantages of Direct Teaching.

Retrieved April 6, 2014, from http://www.brighthubeducation.com/teaching-methods-

tips/5487-pros-and-cons-of-direct-teaching/

Mastery learning. (2007, August 14). Retrieved March 16, 2014, from

http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Mastery_learning

Mastery learning. (2007, August 14). Retrieved March 16, 2014, from

http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Mastery_learning

Nesbitt, C. (2013, January 14). How the work of Pavlov influenced education [Web log post].

Retrieved April 02, 2014, from http://christophernesbitt.wordpress.com/2013/01/14/how-

the-work-of-pavlov-influenced-education/

Robinson, M. (1992). Mastery learning in public schools: Some areas of restructuring.

Education, 113(1), 121-126.

Simulations. (2013, November 14). Retrieved April 06, 2014, from

http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Simulations

Stein, M., Carnine, D., & Dixon, R. (1998). Direct instruction: Integrating curriculum design and

effective teaching practice. Intervention in School and Clinic, 33(4), 227-234.

Wiggins, G. (2014). How good is good enough? Educational Leadership, 71(4), 10-16.

13