Author: instructorknapp

What a journey! After 16 weeks of reading and research, I have learned so much about Trauma-Informed educational models and Social Emotional Learning this semester! And yet if I were to estimate how much I have read compared to the amount of information out there—it would probably be about .001% of the total body of knowledge created by researchers and clinicians over the last couple of decades. The word burgeoning comes to mind when considering all the brain and learning science that has grown out of…well, technology, really. Because researchers before technology (BT) couldn’t measure the brain, map the brain or observe the inner-workings of the brain in action.

Despite all this empirical energy, enthusiasm, expertise, and technology, however, the revolution needed to transform educational models into trauma-informed (AKA Enlightened) models has yet to occur.

Why, is this the case, you ask?

It certainly isn’t that the need for these systems has decreased; there are no signs of traumatic events in American culture decreasing anytime soon. Perhaps, it’s that people have reached a higher plane of enlightenment through advanced practice of social emotional skills on their own, and so they are now better able to cope with trauma, get on with their lives freed from the bursts of emotion-based behavior that not only disrupts their own lives but the lives of everyone around them to the point of becoming toxic to self and others?

Currently trending Twitter feeds prove otherwise.

And so do the facts. According to Michael Moe, et al. (2018), in A 2 Apple News “Beary Merry Christmas” post: “In the United States, suicide rates are up 30% over the past twenty years. Opioid deaths increased 45% to 75,000 casualties last year alone. That’s more than the number of people who died in traffic accidents. Add it up, and life expectancy for U.S. citizens actually fell last year.”

The bottom line: Kids who have experienced trauma will continue to be in our classrooms for a long time to come.  These kids may grow up to be well adjusted adults capable of managing the impacts of trauma because they have adequate family support systems, healthy community-based relationships and enough emotional and financial resources to get back on their feet— or not. Some may get to the point of being high functioning, productive, valued members of society—that is for sure. Others may live on the brink of the abyss. Never certain what the next day may bring.

And what happens when you add climate refugees to our long list of traumatic woes? Alaska, Texas, Florida, North Carolina, California—all know the trauma that inevitably accompanies natural disasters. Never forget Paradise, California. Home to 26,000 people, Paradise burned to the ground in less time than most people spend on air travel. How can resilience thrive when your whole town is erased?

All of this indicates that our educational systems need to address the impacts of trauma, and in order to do this we need to 1) acknowledge the widespread impacts of trauma and 2) help educators build emotional safety, relationships and self-regulatory skills in the classroom.

Volumes of Learning Science research shows that the emotional regulatory capacity of the learner may be one of the greatest predictors of success—and also one of the key tools that we have to improve equity in our educational systems—so how come we see so few educational systems focus on building these self-regulatory skills?

Simple answer: we put too much of the burden on teachers. Even if we want to classify teachers as Saints there are practical pedagogical limits to what they can do in the classroom. I hate to beat the same drum here, but what we need to do instead of asking educators to do more in the classroom is to build better systems that will help educators: help educators, help students.

These systems should require only quick, micro-training or no training at all. The technology must be interactive and user friendly. Think iPhone. Think television. Plug, then play. Gaming environments, mobile devices, ipads can all deliver what we know teachers need. Teachers should benefit from these tools as much as students.

Like this one:

https://www.sowntogrow.com/

This is an example of a practical “help educators, help students” tool that provides a research-based trauma-informed toolkit—only you would never know it. Because it does something useful! It provides the framework that all kids need to build planning and self-regulation skills without calling attention to the other benefits embedded in its research-based instructional design. Love Sown to Grow! Hurray!

Or this one:

https://www.teachemotionalregulation.com/kidconnect

Love the awareness and inclusion built into this tool! Instead of receiving a one-way ticket to the principal’s office, KidConnect helps connect the behavior to the emotion behind that behavior allowing the teacher to better intervene and allowing the child to start self-regulating for learning. A win-win!

This one’s a bit pricey and extravagant for young kids, but older students and teachers would like this real time self-regulation gadget:

Heart Math

Did you know the heart sends more messages to the brain than the other way around? Hearts are the first responders when it comes to emotions apparently—so happy hearts lead the way to learning. Heart rate is a key indicator for dis-regulation, according to researchers, so thinking of heart happy activities in the first few minutes of class (instead of a quiz!) can get the brain ready for learning. What makes your heart happy? Movement, music, deep breathing, visualizations, visual imagery, massage, stretching, positive relationships, healthy conversations,  animals—rabbits, turtles, fish, dogs, cats, horses (!)—all make our hearts happy. Once our hearts feel calm and regulated then we are ready to learn.

Ultimately, only a systems approach can address the widespread impacts of trauma in education. So leaving economics out of the equation simply won’t work. Financial stability equals freedom and all the emotional skills in the world will only support half of  a career in a global, knowledge-based economy. So apprenticeships are a vital part of the trauma-informed equation. Kids need to see a path upward toward freedom and that motivation will drive change. Which is why programs like those featured in Doc Maker’s

Job Centered Learning: http://docmakeronline.com/job_centered_learning.html

are so important. Learning science confirms motivation and resilience are linked to learning. The power of knowing that your path forward promises financial stability cannot be overlooked.

So proud of my collaboration with amazingly smart Team One in the MIST Program @CSUMB. We had less than a week to read multiple theoretical research articles and formulate an opinion on Behaviorism theory in Education. We hammered out this collaboratively written op-ed in less than three days despite hectic schedules. We require that you listen to The Wall while reading, however.

By Karin Pederson, Sondre Hammer Fossness, Shwetha Prahlad, Russell Fleming and Stacey Knapp

“Wrong, Do it again!”
“If you don’t eat yer meat, you can’t have any pudding. How can you
have any pudding if you don’t eat yer meat?”
“You! Yes, you behind the bikesheds, stand still laddy!”
Lyrics from The Wall, Pink Floyd (1979)

Pink Floyd’s lyrics memorialized a behavioristic educational perspective in this description of an English boarding school: “Wrong, Do it Again! If you don’t eat your meat, you can’t have any pudding.” Early educational interpretations of the behaviorist model went as far as to include physical punishment as a behavioral deterrent—whether “stand still laddy” in Floyd’s lyrics imply a schoolyard paddling or not is unclear, but what is clear now is that, in its most extreme form—physical punishment— the behaviorist model no longer has a place in American educational systems. Despite this controversial past, instructional designers should take a second look at this historical framework in order to understand the powerful impacts and implications of the “conditioned response,” a central tenet of behaviorism. Without this understanding, educational technology products and instructional design could inadvertently be delivering a deleterious effect on learning.

While the 21st century educational landscape has erased physically “unpleasant” consequences, the behaviorist model is alive and well as demonstrated by the rampancy of meritocracy throughout our educational landscape. Skinner’s (1938) premise that an individual makes an association between a particular behavior and a consequence, and unpleasant consequences are not likely to be repeated (Thorndike, 1898) continues to hold value today. So if we leave a trail of positive feedbacks, then the learner will follow the path paved by rewards (and badges!) and avoid the pathways that lead to failure.

Not so fast! Designers should consider a few key behavioristic concepts, especially when creating merit-based learning environments:

Rewarding Laziness
The quiz is nothing new to classrooms, but the instant-feedback customizations possible in online educational environments require a deeper consideration of behavioralism than pen and paper quizzes of yesterday. Learners answer wrong, ‘and then what happens?’ For example, many online quizzing systems give students a chance to correct their own answer immediately after their first response. In practice, this means that it is fairly easy to click through a test and achieve high scores. From a behavioristic perspective, the student will experience a positive reinforcement in the form of a good grade regardless of their preparation. (Why read, if I get an A without reading?) As a result, negative reinforcement (the bad grade) is weakened and the potential for a positive reinforcement for under-preparation is strengthened.

Skinner introduced the principle of “operant conditioning,” which was based on Thorndike’s “Law of Effect” that states: a behavior followed by pleasing consequences is likely to be repeated. So what if incorrect behavior leads to pleasing consequences? By removing all negative reinforcement, it can be argued that, from a behavioristic perspective, the design encourages the “try and fail” method instead of making sure that the answer submitted is correct by reading over the material once more. In other words, students get pleasant consequences from lazy behavior.

Not a One-Size-Fits-All Solution
Behaviorism in practice will ultimately be influenced by learners’ intrinsic motivation. And identifying positive rewards in context specific learning scenarios can be challenging. (While first grade students may find a trip to the candy jar or reading bean bag motivating, what motivates a highschool student?) Therefore, the learning outcome achieved by learners may vary greatly from student to student depending on intrinsic motivation. Such an uncertain variable makes behaviorism fall short as an all encompassing tool for learning, either in classroom or online.

Another important consideration for instructional designers to consider is whether or not receiving extrinsic rewards or punishments might become the rule of life for students. Researchers point out that students may require validation for every task, or expect positive reinforcements for even minor tasks which might not always come with a reward. In this situation, a student might stop caring or feel unmotivated to finish the homework if s/he does not get a reward.

Undesirable Rewards
Morrison (2007) explains that an individual may not particularly be interested in certain kinds of positive reinforcements. If “candies” are used as rewards for every correct response, then if the student was not “particularly interested in candies,” (p. 211) it might not be the best motivation for students to strive for (and, ideally obtain) correct answers. The author further argues that unless the student “could be given the choice between a number of different reinforcements so that they could choose one that was desirable for them” using particular positive reinforcements might not produce the intended result (Morrison, 2007, p. 211).

Pink Floyd’s famous refrain “We don’t need no education” was an unintended consequence of behavioralism in Britain’s 20th century educational system, and the album reached number 1 on the U.S. Billboard by 1980, eventually becoming one the top five greatest selling albums of all time. Instructional designers need to take a second look at behaviorist theory and consider unintended consequences when designing merit-based systems, or risk becoming as Floyd’s lyrics warn: “just another brick in the wall.”

References
Pink Floyd. (1979). The Wall. Los Angeles: EMI. (1979)

Reiser, R. A., & Dempsey, J. V. (2017). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th Edition). New York : Pearson.
Thorndike, E. L. (1898). Animal intelligence: An experimental study of the associative processes in animals. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 2(4), i-109.

Morrison, Aubrey (2007): The Relative Effects of Positive Reinforcement, Response-Cost, and a Combination Procedure on Task Performance with Variable Task Difficulty. The Huron University College Journal of Learning and Motivation: Vol. 45: Iss. 1, Article 12.

Flipped instruction is essentially inside out teaching, reversed instruction. Homework takes place inside class time, and lectures go outside.

Guiding principals: cognitive learning science.

One of the advantages of this model is that problem-solving during class time provides instant feedback. Whether they are working on a team or not, allowing students to interact, to ask questions, as they problem solve provides multiple support systems. Instead of just the instructor, peers become valuable resources. In my flipped classrooms, even when students are working individually, they always have the option to ask questions with their peers. I am not the only valuable source of information in the class.

However, I do offer my guidance directly during this time by circling the room.

Listening or looking over students’ shoulders, and commenting directly on their work, provides individualized instruction during class time. This direction occurs during production and therefore asks students to apply targeted learning in context and thus may lead to a higher likelihood of success.

This connection—between students and teacher and student— in the act of solving a problem—is an irreplaceable and valuable resource, perhaps the greatest resource in face-to-face education. Master-apprentice models data back to the ancients, for good reason. They work. This model can also be enacted in fully online courses, but with much more effort and intention in the instructional design of the course. Making it quite likely that, in some disciplines, mastering the technical aspects of this modality may exceed justifiable limits in investments of money, time, and/or expertise.

I use Bloom’s Taxonomy as a Guide to decide what goes outside and inside the classroom,

 The top half of the pyramid goes inside and the bottom half goes outside.

Step One

Assign Homework

Watch Lecture; Take Notes. (Remember, Understand) or Watch Lecture and complete activity, such as a diagram, quiz or reflection assignment (Remember, Understand, Apply)

Read Textbook; Complete online “Adaptive” quiz series—Remember, Understand, Apply.

Step Two

Facilitate Problem-Solving Classroom

Design lessons wherein students Analyze, Evaluate and/or Create with the material covered in the homework.

Step Three

Repeat

Step Four

Create Check Points  (Graded but Low Stakes)

Have students complete a Low-Stakes Assessment. This can be done either outside or inside of class, but must be a chance to practice and receive feedback prior to formal assessment. Homework assignments work great for this, but these formative assessments can also be part of the active learning taking place in the class.

Step Five

Administer Formal Assessment

This assessment should have a rubric that clearly aligns with learning outcomes associated with the assignment. Unlike the formative assessment, where feedback is crucial, the formal assessment should be light on manual instructor feedback because the rubric/score should send a clear message to students as to where they excelled and where they need to improve. Frequent communication with Instructors should be encouraged. If there are questions from students about these scores, instructors should look at student models either during class time and via one-on-one video conferences, or in-person office hour setting. This feedback loop is one of the most valuable aspects of instruction and cannot be duplicated by machines—so affording time for this discussion should be a top faculty priority and flipped environments afford faculty this time.