INTRODUCTION

Behaviourist principles have become an important theory in education.

Due to this, the writer will discuss the effectiveness of behaviourist principles in

Malaysian classroom. There are two forms of learning which are classical and

operant conditioning. However, operant conditioning will be emphasized in this

essay. The writer will focus specifically on the role of reinforcement as well as

punishment in operant conditioning and how these behavior modifications are

effective in Malaysian classrooms. The writer will then stress on other learning

theories that would also be effective to be applied in Malaysian classroom which

are social cognitive (peer collaboration) and social constructivism (technology)

theories. In conclusion, the writer will highlight the effectiveness of behaviourist

principles among students in Malaysian classroom.

OPERANT CONDITIONING

Operant conditioning is a form of learning in which voluntary responses

are influenced by their consequences (Sang, 2006). According to behavioural

view, consequences determine to a great extent whether a person will repeat the

behaviour that led to the consequences (Woolfolk, 2007). In this context, the

writer refers consequences as reinforcement and punishment.

A) Reinforcement

A reinforcer is any consequence that increases the frequency of a

particular behaviour, whether or not people find that that consequence pleasant

(Ormrod, 2008). Reinforcement is used to strengthen the students’ desired

behaviour. There are a few forms of reinforcements which can strengthen

1
students’ behaviour such as token economy, praise, attention, and giving them

opportunity to involve in their favourite activities. According to Mok Soon Sang

(2006), the use of positive reinforcement which gives pleasant result is more

effective than negative reinforcement. Positive reinforcement can be defined as

consequence that brings about the increase of a behaviour through the

presentation (rather than the removal) of a stimulus (Ormrod, 2008).

Token economy is a system of individual reinforcement of target behaviors

in which tokens are administered and exchanged later for backup reinforcers

(Token Economy, n.d). For example, an English teacher in Malaysian primary

school is teaching her students on how to write simple sentences. The teacher

gives the students some exercises which require them to construct their own

simple sentences. The teacher has informed earlier that any student, who can

complete the task given in time and do their work in silence, will receive a token

which is a sticker chart. According to Marzuki (2006), token economy is effective

to encourage positive behaviour among students. Students believe learning is

more interesting when they are rewarded. The students, who can write simple

sentences silently and correctly in exact time, are given two sticker charts for

each question. When using rewards to motivate students, it is important that

students make a connection between the reason for the reward and the behavior

and the reward is meaningful to the student (Witzel & Mercer, 2003 as cited in

Weeks, n.d.).

Reinforcement should be given immediately to the students to ensure its

effectiveness. The token cannot be too abstract, must be immediate and occur

2
often for this type of intervention to work (Moore, 1999 as cited in Weeks, n.d).

Besides, the teacher should praise their effort which indirectly will make them

positively reinforced. At the same time, the teacher must also help other students

who cannot complete the task in the time given. These weak students are

encouraged to finish their tasks as the teacher should give positive feedback and

responses to any questions posted by them. Therefore, other students will not

feel left out and they will try their best to complete the task. After completing the

task, these students will receive a sticker chart for a question as reinforcement

which will lead them to perform better next time. Norhasyimah (2005) stated that

token economy is able to measure students’ participation in learning. The main

goal for providing students with extrinsic rewards is to motivate them to succeed

and for them to grow and develop their own intrinsic motivation (Witzel & Mercer,

2003 as cited in Weeks, n.d.).

As soon as the students have collected ten pieces of sticker charts, they

are given the opportunity to use a computer for thirty minutes. Once the students

have mastered to write simple sentences, the number of token given should be

decreased gradually. By gradually decreasing the availability of tokens (fading),

students should learn to display the desirable behavior independently, without

the unnatural use of tokens (Token economy system, 2007). However, the

teacher should continue giving effective praise to the students when they

complete the task given very well. Hence, the students will still be positively

reinforced through effective praises from the teacher and this situation will lead

the students to perform better in the next tasks.

3
 B) Punishment

In this section, the writer will be focusing on the element of punishment in

the merit and demerit system. Punishment refers to responses that bring painful

or undesirable consequences will be suppressed, but may reappear if

reinforcement contingencies change (Mergel, 1998). Punishment is designed to

weaken undesired behaviour. Hence, merit and demerit system is more

preferable compared to physical punishment to overcome discipline problems in

schools as public canning is banned in Malaysia (Khaleej Times, 2006).

Merit and demerit system is based on behaviourist theory which

emphasizes on reward and punishment. The students will be given points as a

reward if they are involved in curriculum activities and charity works while as a

punishment for not obeying the school rules, points will be deducted. The

important feature of this system is transparency and a sense of fair play in every

punishment or reward meted out (Lian, 2004).

For example, a group of footballers in a secondary school has been

caught for coming late to class since the last two weeks without concrete

reasons. Through merit and demerit discipline system, these students are

punished by eliminating ten points for each time they come late. When the

eliminated points are up to seventy points, the students have lost their

opportunity to join football training and represent their school in the next football

match which is in the next month. Indirectly, removal punishment is being applied

in this situation. Removal punishment refers to punishment involving removal of

an existing stimulus, presumably one a learner does not want to lose (Ormrod,

4
2008). In this situation, representing their school in football match is the stimulus

that the students do not want to lose. Hence, the teacher can shape the students’

positive behaviour by encouraging these students to come early to class. The

teacher needs to observe the students’ attendance for the whole month to ensure

these students’ positive responses. Positive reinforcement which is getting the

opportunity to join the football training for each day they come early to class is

given to these particular students. According to Norhasyimah (2005), reward can

increase students’ positive bahaviour and participate in learning. Indirectly, this

situation will lead to increase the possibility of students’ positive response.

Hence, these students are positively reinforced and they will come early to class.

Indirectly, the teacher successes in shaping the positive behaviour of coming

early to class in these students. In Malaysia, St Thomas Secondary School in

Sarawak is successful of resolving their discipline problems through the

implementation of an integrated and systematic discipline system called the

"Merit and Demerit Discipline System" (MDDS) (Lian, 2004).

OTHER LEARNING THEORY

A) Peer Collaboration

According to Koschmann, Kelson, Feltovich and Barrows (1996),

meaningful group discussions can lead to cognitive development (Lee & Ertmer,

2006). Peers can influence cognitive development and ZPD among Malaysian

students. Ormrod (2008) mentioned that their discussions involve debates and

disagreement; children may analyse the arguing process and so acquire an

ability to look at other situations from multiple angles. As a result, their thought is

5
nurtured since they encode new information in their memory. Later, the

information will be applied to resolve problems. Besides, the students who study

in groups can also learn important life skills such as how to communicate well

with others and respect other’s opinion. Discourse in collaborative learning is one

of the ways of triggering more learning mechanisms and cognitive mechanism,

and hence, it should be promoted in learning (Choo, n.d). Group work can

contribute to increase self-efficacy. In peer conversations, children improve their

logical, analytical abilities and their problem-solving skills (Light & Glachan, 1983,

as cited in Ben-Ari, n.d.). Students can share their views on many things freely

with their peers who observe this world differently from them. Ben-Ari (n.d.)

mentioned that Kruger and Tomasello (1986) found that children tend to give

rationales and to justify with their peers more than with adults. In addition,

students’ level of ZPD is different from each other. Students also have different

level of cognitive development. Indirectly, students who are educated by their

peers have better ways of solving problems and gain greater knowledge. Due to

this, students’ behaviour may have been manipulated significantly in this

cooperative learning. According to Jayaletchmy (2004), participation in learning

increases and the nature of their discourses become more analytic and problem-

solution-oriented. During this session, they can verbalize their thoughts and have

greater use of higher-level thinking skills to solve any task given by the teacher.

Thus, effective learning process will occur in Malaysian classroom.

6
 B) Technology

Technology such as internet supports discovery learning among

Malaysian students. Researches (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000; Roschelle,

Pea, Hoadley, Gordin, & Means, 2000) contend that “new information and

communications (ICT) can bring exciting curricula based on real-world problems

into the classrooms, and provide scaffolds and tools to enhance learning”

(Kozma, 2003, p.2). Technologically based classroom is fully equipped with the

computers, internet access that allow students to explore and discover

knowledge and information. Students have to search for the information on their

own. In addition, students also learn how to search for information without relying

or being spoon-fed by teachers. Hence, the students can enhance their cognitive

development as they learn on how to search for information independently. In a

study that explored the effectiveness of electronic models for increasing pre-

service teachers’ self-efficacy for technology integration (Ertmer et al., 2003),

results showed a significant increase in students’ judgement of confidence after

viewing successful models in a hypermedia environment (Lee & Ertmer, 2006).

Smart School Project is a brilliant idea from Ministry of Education Malaysia

(MOE) in the direction of moulding creative and critical thinkers in Malaysia. MOE

(2004) mentioned that one of the Smart school objectives is to produce a thinking

and technology-literate workforce.

According to Bitter and Pierson (1999, p.13), as cited in Scheidet (2003,

p.79), “computers force teachers to look more closely at individual students and

their needs rather than addressing the class as a whole with one blanket method

7
or technique. Learning can then become driven by student needs”. Teachers and

students are enabled to build local and global communities through networked

technology that connect them with interested people and expand opportunities

for learning. Thus, technology can lead students to learn more successfully and

competently as it encourage discovery learning among students. Lee & Zulkifli

(1998, as cited in Choo, n.d) reported that network learning activity has produced

the following benefits on the learners: i) increased the awareness of audience

through various elaborations or clarification of matters which were unfamiliar or in

doubt to the target audience, ii) increased opportunities to share and enrich

ideas, allay fears regarding the use of technology, and stimulate interest to learn

more by doing research.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the writer agrees to a certain extend that behaviourist

theory is effective in Malaysian classroom. Reinforcement and punishment do

have the power to control students’ behaviour and academic achievements.

However, other learning theories which are social cognitive and social

constructivism are also found effective in Malaysian classroom. Social cognitive

theory which emphasizes on peer collaboration is an effective way as it

enhances students’ cognitive development. On the other hand, social

constructivism highlights the role of technology which encourages discovery

learning among the students.

8
REFERENCES

Abdul Rahim Marzuki (2006). Pelaksanaan program ekonomi token dalam

mengurangkan tingkahlaku bermasalah murid pemulihan khas satu kajian
kes [The implementation of token economy to decrease problematic
behaviours among remedial students: A case study]. Seminar
penyelidikan pendidikan guru peringkat kebangsaan tahun 2006 (pp. 102
114). Kuala Lumpur: Institut Perguruan Bahasa-bahasa Antarabangsa

Ben-Ari, R. (n.d.). Complex Instruction and Cognitive Development. Retrieved

August 12th, 2008, from [Link]

.Choo, K. A. (n.d). Online collaborative learning for Malaysian secondary

schools:issue and challenges. Retrieved August 16, 2008, from
[Link]
[Link]

Jayaletchemy d/o Ramasamy. (2004). The effects of peer tutoring on the

language performance of low achievers in an ESL class. Unpublished
master’s thesis. University of Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Kozma, R. B. (2003). Technology and classroom practises: An international

study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36 (1), 1-13.

Lee, Y. & Ertmer, P.A. (2006). Examining the effect of small group discussions
and question prompts on vicarious outcomes. Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, 39 (1).

Lian, F. (2004). School Discipline: Sarawak School Shows the Better Way.
Retrieved August 18, 2008, from [Link]

.Mergel, B. (1998). Instructional design and learning theory. Retrieved August 20,
2008, from[Link]
mergel/[Link]

Merrell, K. (2000). Effective Use of Time-Out Procedures To Reduce Child

Misbehavior. Retrieved August 16, 2008, from[Link]
[Link]/schpsych/handouts/[Link]

Ministry of Education, Malaysia. (2004). The Malaysian Smart School. A flagship

application of the multimedia super corridor. Ministry of Education,
Malaysia.

Norhasyimah bt Ahmad (2005). Penggunaan Sistem Ganjaran Dalam

Meningkatkan Penglibatan Murid-murid Tahun 2 Murni Dalam Sesi
9
 Pengajaran Dan Pembelajaran Bagi Mata Pelajaran Sains [Use of
reward in enhancing Year Two Murni students' participation in
teaching and earning in science]. Prosiding seminar penyelidikan
pendidikan Institut Perguruan Bahasa-bahasa Antarabangsa (pp.158-
166). Kuala Lumpur: Institut Perguruan Bahasa-bahasa Antarabangsa

Ormrod, J. E. (2008). Educational Psychology: Developing Learners (6th ed.).

New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Sang, M. S. (2006). Education Studies for KPLI (Theme 1): Educational

Psychology. Selangor: Multimedia-ES Resources [Link].

Time out. (n.d). Retrieved August 17, 2008, from [Link]

com/practice/tools/instruction/[Link]

Times, K. (2006). Malaysia to ban public caning of errant schoolchildren.

Retrieved August 19, 2008, from [Link]

Token Economy. (n.d). Retrieved August 16, 2008, from[Link]

teachall/text/behavior/LRBIpdfs/[Link]

Token economy system. (2007). Retrieved August 19, 2008, from[Link]

[Link]/Py-Z/[Link]

Weeks, D. (n.d). Token Economy Systems used for Classroom Management for
Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. Retrieved August 20,
2008, from[Link]
[Link]

Woolfolk, A. (2007). Educational Psychology. USA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Wright, J. (2002). Time Out From Reinforcement. Retrieved August 15, 2008,
from [Link]

10
11