Reinforcers - Collaborative problem solving and SDT - self determination theory

Reinforcers -  I believe we must differentiate between reinforcers that are intrinsic – the process is rewarding or there is goal identification – the end product , rather than some extrinsic reward that parents offer.

We should be guided by the questions ? –how does my intervention impact on my kid's needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness- SDT and how my interventions will meet both kids and parents concerns and solve problems - CPS .

 If the kid feels he needs some extrinsic motivation, I would first clarify his goals – for eg practicing piano 5 times a week and  see how some extrinsic motivation will help him achieve his goal. Here he wants to meet his goal,  the reward is there just to help him get there. What happens in practice is that kids are willing to suffer  - practice or do homework for a price.

Competence -  If a kid is reluctant to engage in an activity and needs to practice to acquire a skill , extrinsic motivation on the one hand can promote competence, but impacts negatively on autonomy and relatedness. A CPS approach is likely to uncover other concerns of the kid and unsolved problems other than motivation. When the reward is self determined , it is not controlling and the reward has less impact on intrinsic motivation.

Extrinsic reinforcers  may be useful with tasks that are manual and require little thinking as they tend to narrow focus.  The promise of a pay-off or a reward interferes with higher levels of thinking and creativity  which are  exploratory or ' wider in  focus'.

Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI),a study showed that entirely different areas of the brain are activated by the same task depending on whether a person anticipates a payoff or not. When focused on a reward, the brain switches off those areas   associated with voluntary or self-initiated activities. '

Pairing an intrinsic reward -  the value expressed by the behavior with an extrinsic reward converts the behavior – a social norm into an economic norm -  so by giving a kid a reward for helping or befriending a lonely kid – a social norm has been given economic value ,  this is what I get for doing that. The internal pride and intrinsic reward of being able express one's self and values gets lost.

The problem with praise is not the quantity – over praising but praise itself- its judgmental nature  . Instead we should use  neutral informational feedback and questions that help kids self asses and reflect on how they impact on their world. Behavior or sticker charts are rather different to a kid self assessing and monitoring his behavior without external forms of control in place.

Extrinsic reinforcers may be helpful in the short –term but like medication I doubt whether any parent would like to see them as a long term solution. They also undermine intrinsic motivation and internalization of values, don't generalize and if their effect is lost when rewards are withdrawn.  They get the kid to ask – what will I get or what is in it for me , instead of asking  and reflecting   -  what type of person  do I want to be , do my actions reflect on my values ?

Recognitions – Behaviorism & Self Determined Theory/ CPS

A Canadian school district – New Brunswick is using Self Determination Theory to promote mental  fitness of students. In a poster the needs for 'competence, autonomy and relatedness' are also presented as recognition=competence, choice= autonomy and belonging= relatedness. 

The words choice and belonging can be used in a discussion about autonomy and relatedness. Recognition however , may impact on 'perceived competence'  but in the absence of meeting objective needs for competence ,  giving recognition is more about  behaviorist practices , extrinsic motivation  than SDT .

Competence

(Recognition)

'I have abilities, strengths and gifts that are recognized by myself and others. When I use them to meet goals and help others I feel a sense of accomplishment and worth.'

I have reservations about using the word recognition.

 Recognition is another word for verbal rewards like praise, awards or actual rewards given in recognition for ' good jobs'. The problem with recognitions is that they are judgmental and controlling.

The idea is that when we ' catch children being good' and   we  recognize their achievements , behavior is reinforced , and they will be encouraged to behave and do well at school.

There is also the belief that children do well if they want to.  They have an 'inner wealth'  which  is hidden by a lack of motivation ,self esteem or belief. All one needs to do is change a kid's perceived competence by praising them as much as possible and creating an illusion of success by setting up the kid to be successful.

The question is asked -  should we not recognize ' excellence', provide feedback and encouragement. ?

We can respond without any evaluative comments about the kid and focus on what the kid is doing – the process, being very specific on what we notice, asking the kid questions like ' why did you decide to end the essay this way or how did you feel when you helped your friend.

Typical school recognitions are done in public, focus on the kid, often using comparisons /competition to encourage other kids as well. Phony praise with lots of energy is used as a deliberate strategy.  Instead we can show warmth, support and encouragement by being genuine.

According to CPS , the  collaborative problem solving approach – children do well if they can . They are not doing well , not because they lack ' perceived competence' , but actually lack skills that enable them to be more flexible and adaptive in school settings. If we want kids to have ' mental health fitness '  - they need to be competent and have the skills needed to be successful. 

Actual competence is the meat , perceived competence is just the spice.

According to SDT , the less extrinsic motivation we use and the more we use ' understatement' , neutral descriptive language we leave room for the kid to come to his own conclusions . This allows him to  internalize the message and  thereby become  more self determined and intrinsically motivated.

Relatedness

(Belonging)

I feel that I belong and am connected to important relationships that support and encourage me. I also support and encourage others in spirit and action.

Perceived competence also fits in here. Feedback, support and encouragement are  very much part of a caring community. Kids need to feel they are accepted for who they are, rather than how they behave or how well they do academically. This is what we call ' unconditional acceptance and love. Typical school recognitions give the kid a message that they are only valued when they perform  -  acceptance is contingent on their behavior.

It is great to talk about values such as community and belonging, but schools need the structures that give expression to this.  School structures are usually competitive and focus on the individual. In a co-operative learning environment, where there are no grades or ranking kids against each other ,  the structure promotes belonging , relatedness and caring

Autonomy

(Choices)

'I have a voice and I am able to make decisions about things that are important to me and others. Others support me in my choices'

Traditional schools and parenting sometimes talk about giving choices. The idea is that when you give choices , kids are most likely to comply with teachers' demands.  Here giving choices is what CPS calls Plan A – adult will.  Do it my way -   A, B, or C.  Choices that give expression to autonomy are not pseudo choices , but like the ones described in the poster -  giving the kid a chance to generate choices , not just choose from options provided by teachers.

Developmental delays - Behaviorism SDT and CPS

I have a very strong bias against behaviorism as my learning is driven by the writings of Alfie Kohn UP= unconditional parenting and Ross Greene – CPS. I also have meager knowledge of behaviorism
Daniel suggested where the child is too low functioning , the most efficient way to improve the child is perhaps through behaviorism.

We could make use of behaviorism in cases where the child's self is not developed to a point that the child is able to self-regulate '.

SDT is not only a ' motivational ' theory , it is also a ' learning and development ' theory . When kids autonomy and relatedness are supported , we facilitate competence , development , growth and creativity and learning. SDT is in fact shares constructivist principles and imho does a much better job in promoting learning of lacking skills than behaviorism.



The CPS - collaborative problem solving approach is a non behaviorist approach for parents , teachers and other care givers dealing with challenging kids. It conforms with SDT principles by supporting kids autonomy by focusing first on their concerns and encouraging them to be the ' genius' in coming up with solutions. The CPS process promotes many of the lacking cognitive skills – competence . Because the process is collaborative and the child also takes perspectives and addresses the concerns of others we have ' relatedness'.

Daniel - I am not quite sure what you mean by behaviorism.

I understand the claim that kids emotional and cognitive states may be chaotic and need some external structure to deal with the world. This means providing rules with rewards and consequences , levels of points, token economies etc which provide structure and reinforce behaviors.

Now motivational strategies don't teach skills. They rest on the premise that children do well if they want to and we must make them want to .

The PBIS -Positive behavior intervention system - a behaviorist approach acknowledges that kids challenges may be due to lacking skills and do provide skills training in a very top down manner .

Now it is possible to provide structure without rewards and punishments and one can teach skills not in a top-down manner , but in a collaborative way and putting the missing skills into the context of the child's concerns and unsolved problems.

CPS trains skills mostly indirectly using Plan B - collaborative problem solving. The approach is very constructivist , that kids learn when they make meaning and construct knowledge . Unlike PBIS , kids are not empty pails who are filled with knowledge and drilled to learn skills.



We do take into account the developmental age of the child , but that does not mean we can be respectful to toddlers , try to see the world through their eyes , and support their autonomy with our questions. For the developmentally challenged child , the parent acts as a ' surrogate frontal lobe ' taking the child through the thinking process. Not only does the child learn skills but there are also changes taking place in the brain – neuro-plasticity . Dr Greene says that kids at 3 years of age have sufficient vocabulary to participate in problem solving.

We don't need to compensate the child's developmental delay of the ' self' and his ability to self regulate with rewards and punishments , we can promote development by working with the child

Rewards and punishments at best can make a kid look good and unfortunately can trigger the inappropriate behaviors that the extrinsic motivation is trying to deal with. SDT imho does make a place for extrinsic motivations where they are self determined or the kid feels that they help him to achieve certain goals.

Behaviorism has impressive results with ABA , training animals to do tricks etc but my gut feeling it is the same process , the kids feelings, concerns , opinions don't really count. We can teach animals to jump and do pretty tricks but remove the scaffolding, the controls they revert back to the old behaviors.



http://www.lostatschool.org/answers/index.htm check the answers on FBAs and PBIS