Second, it suggests that once an appropriate curriculum has been compiled -- one that produces the appropriate results -- then this very same curriculum should produce the same results every time it is employed properly. And third, it suggests that language itself cannot be conceived of as anything other than a response to an external stimulus; therefore, we, as teachers, should not be concerned with the internal, conceptual aspects of learning a language, and only with the observable, verbal responses that our teaching techniques produce. Of course, these stand as direct consequences of accepting the theory of behaviorism within the context of teaching ESL; however, my experience has shown that, if anything, the version of behaviorism that allows for consciousness is the most beneficial for developing an efficient and successful approach towards teaching.
Unfortunately for the theory of behaviorism, this phenomenon is not easily explained without the existence of internal thought mechanisms or the students' ability to freely choose to not resist learning. Without the existence of this free choice, we would expect that any approach towards teaching would have produced the desired output. In other words, if human behavior is deterministic, then there is little to suggest that my students would choose to resist attempts to teach them English. Yet, Skinner explicitly embraces these apparent consequences of hard determinism: "Unlike the soft determinists, however, Skinner agrees with his critics. His kind of determinism permits no freedom or dignity, but that is a small price to pay, he says, since freedom and dignity, as they are usually understood, are overrated goods," (Feinberg 414). Skinner, and others, is willing to break the commonplace perceptions of reality to extend the notion of direct cause and effect to everything in the universe, and thus eliminating the possibility of free will. So overall, it may not be the case that this experience in the classroom can simply be characterized as a very complex interplay of input and output, but may in fact have possessed an aspect of conscious decision-making.
My experience has provided an objection to behaviorism as a comprehensive theory of language: even if there is a direct correlation between an input and an output, this does not automatically imply that a language has been learned. Searle provided a similar objection based upon what he called the "Chinese room" thought experiment. Essentially, "The argument centers on a thought experiment in which someone who knows only English sits alone in a room following English instructions for manipulating strings of Chinese characters, such that to those outside the room it appears as if someone in the room understands Chinese," (Cole). We are to imagine that Searle is sitting in a room that represents a computer, and a series of instructions for manipulating Chinese characters, given a certain input, are provided for him. So, when he sees one specific character located in one place, he is supposed to supply another specific character located in another. In the thought experiment we are to believe that the algorithm for Searle in his room is detailed enough that Chinese speaking people outside the room can slip any phrase under the door, and Searle is capable of generating a coherent response -- it appears as if he understands Chinese.
This is a direct challenge of the behaviorists' claim that anything that performs a certain function must be assumed to understand that function in a way analogous to how human being do -- known as functionalism. After all, Searle understands not a word of Chinese, but behaviorists would be forced to conclude that he was fluent in the language. Accordingly, I have also been led to believe that simply eliciting the proper responses from my students is not at all the same as teaching them the English language; in this respect, behaviorism is a severely insufficient tool towards teaching.
So, while the fundamental concepts underlying behaviorism are doubtlessly beneficial in teaching ESL, it should, under no conditions, be interpreted to be the definitive and decisive approach towards teaching. Its most direct application must be the concern for the learning environment, and in paying close attention to the physical inputs that are required for any particular class of students. Although this is a key aspect of teaching, a teacher must be concerned with more comprehensive and internal theories of learning.
So, within the context of language awareness, we should be inclined to accept the notion that the human being cannot simply be characterized as an input-output mechanism, though in many isolated cases this may be beneficial. One of the main observational considerations that needs to be taken into account is the aforementioned progression...
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now