Comparing Rewards and Punishments in Pakistani Schools: Urban vs. Rural Perspective, Summaries of Technology

Download Comparing Rewards and Punishments in Pakistani Schools: Urban vs. Rural Perspective and more Summaries Technology in PDF only on Docsity! Contemporary Issues In Education Research – January 2010 Volume 3, Number 1 127 Comparison Of The Frequency And Effectiveness Of Positive And Negative Reinforcement Practices In Schools Hukam Dad, National University of Modern Languages, Pakistan Riasat Ali, University of Science and Technology, Pakistan Muhammad Zaigham Qadeer Janjua, University of Science and Technology, Pakistan Saqib Shahzad, University of Science and Technology, Pakistan Muhammad Saeed Khan, University of Hazara, Haripur Campus, Pakistan ABSTRACT The major purpose of the study was to compare the frequency and effectiveness of positive and negative reinforcement practices deployed by teachers in boys‟ and girls‟ secondary schools in urban and rural areas. It was hypothesized that there would be no difference in use of reward and punishment by teachers in secondary schools in urban and rural areas with respect to their frequency and effectiveness. The results of this study brought out a clear picture of the reward and punishment practices being followed in schools, which may serve as a useful tool for improving these practices that influence development of students‟ desired behaviour. The population of the study comprised of the teachers serving in government secondary schools of Punjab. A sample of 1,000 teachers (200 from district Rawalpindi, 150 from district Attock, 200 from district Lahore, 150 from district Gujranwala, 150 from district Multan, and 150 from district Khanewal) was randomly selected in such a way that the proportion of rural and urban boys‟ and girls‟ secondary school teachers was evenly balanced. In order to collect data from sample teachers, a comprehensive questionnaire was developed and personally administered. The data obtained was tabulated, analyzed and interpreted by using appropriate descriptive and inferential tests of significance, such as one-way chi-square and two-way chi-square. The level of significance was 0.05. On the basis of results and discussion, it was concluded that the teachers of urban schools had better knowledge of using reward and punishment with respect to their frequency and effectiveness as well. There should be a countrywide program to train teachers according to the demands of the new era. Keywords: reinforcement, positive & negative reinforcement, stimulus, achievement INTRODUCTION eachers play the most important and practical role in education. They are said to be the builders or architects of a nation. The teacher is the central log in the machinery of education. The quality and worth of teachers determine the quality of education (Slavin, 1997). Teaching facilitates learning. Learning is a complex phenomenon that has been explained differently. Skinner, a behavioural psychologist and founder of operant conditioning, views operant conditioning as a form of learning in which the consequences of behaviour lead to changes in the probability of that behaviour‟s occurrence. The consequence (rewards or punishments) are contingent on the organism‟s behaviour (Halonen, 1996). According to Madsen and Madsen (1970), behavior that goes unrewarded will extinguish the thought that the teacher must watch the student carefully to determine the payoff. The teacher must also recognize individual T Contemporary Issues In Education Research – January 2010 Volume 3, Number 1 128 differences; the payoff is often different for each child. For example, students A, B and C talk in class. After many warnings the teacher finally sends them to the principal‟s office. This is just exactly what student A wanted; he finally managed to goad the teacher into “punishing” him. Student B just liked to make the teacher angry. Every time she got stern it just “broke him up.” He knows he was bothering her, and he enjoyed her distress-“Wow! She gave me such stern looks.” Student C did not care about the teacher or the principal. He did care about students A and B. Every time he talked, they listened. On the way to the principal‟s office, student A filled the others in. “Listen, the principal sits you down and comes and comes on with all this „You‟ve got to be a good boy‟ stuff. Man, the last time I was in there I really had him snowed. Besides, he never checks to see if you go back to the class, they will continue to talk-even more. Child (1993) gives importance of rewards in the teaching/learning process as “the rewarding of appropriate behavior is bread and butter to the teacher.” Lepper and Greene (1978) mention that the use of “reinforcement” in the vocabulary of instrumental conditioning was promoted in the mid-1930, particularly by Skinner and primarily as a substitute for the traditional term “reward,” whose very age tainted it with the suspicion of mentalism. Mentalism notwithstanding, “reward” was more neutral than “reinforce,” for while a reward simply names a class of events that have some effect on the organism, “reinforcement” implies what the effect is namely a strengthening. “This serves as a reward or – to use a term which is less likely to be misunderstood -„reinforcement‟ for the desired behaviour” (Skinner, 1948). “Good things are positive reinforcers… The things we call bad… are all negative reinforcers, and we are reinforced when we escape from or avoid them” (Skinner, 1957). By the second definition, reinforcers are rewards that are delivered contingent upon the occurrence of some desired response. The first and second definitions are mutually compatible and consistent with the layman‟s view of rewards; i.e. rewards are good things that can be obtained as a result of good behaviour. By Skinner‟s third definition, reinforcers must reinforce or strengthen behaviour. This definition is Skinner‟s favorite for scientific purposes. A reinforcer is any stimulus event that follows an operant response and thereby increases the strength (or probability of occurrence) of that response. Response rate provides the usual performance measure of increased response probability. Skinner (1953) identifies two main classes of reinforcers - positive and negative. Positive reinforcers increase response probability by being added to the situation; negative reinforcers increase response probability by being removed. Positive reinforcers are those desired, sought-after stimuli, such as food, praise and money that we ordinarily call rewards. The main purpose of giving punishments and rewards is to decrease or increase the behaviour of the learner. Punishment; i.e. presenting an unpleasant reinforcer after the occurrence of undesirable response, at times does not help in stopping the undesirable behaviour and reward; i.e. presenting something pleasant after the occurrence of desirable behavior, does not often result in enhancing the performance of the students. The basic reason behind the yielded circumstances is that teachers are not well familiar with different types of rewards and various kinds of punishments along with their effective use. Teachers are not fully aware of the appropriate use of reward and punishment techniques for the desired change in character, behaviour and performance of the students. Often the teachers inadvertently select and use inappropriate types of rewards and punishments for the students as they are devoid of the knowledge of modern behaviour psychology. Therefore, in order to bring about change into behaviour and learning of the students, the use of modern knowledge about behaviour modification techniques is necessary so that deterioration in the quality of education and behaviour may be improved. According to Woolfolk (1998), punishment is, at best, a means of the suppressing behavior either by the presentation of something negative or by the removal of something positive. Punishment is a very popular method for influencing behavior in schools. According to Nairne (2003), the term punishment is used to refer to consequences that decrease the likelihood of responding. Like reinforcement, punishment comes in two forms: positive and negative. Contemporary Issues In Education Research – January 2010 Volume 3, Number 1 131 randomly selected as the sample of the study (200 from district Rawalpindi, 200 from District Lahore, 150 from District Attock, 150 from district Gujranwala, and 150 each from Districts Multan and Khenwal). A questionnaire for secondary school teachers was prepared and validated through pilot-testing and was used as the research instrument for the study. The researcher personally (where possible) distributed the questionnaires to the respondent and through others, where required, and collected and received the responses. The researcher received all the responses, so the response percentage was 100 percent. Analysis of Data This section deals with analysis and interpretation of data obtained through questionnaires as research tools. Table 1: You offer punishment without being furious A O ST AN N Total 2 Urban teachers 182 36.40% 102 20.40% 66 13.20% 26 5.20% 124 24.80% 500 34.83* Rural teachers 108 21.60% 97 19.40% 109 21.80% 42 8.40% 144 28.80% 500 *Significant df=4 2 at 0.05 level = 9.4 Table 1 indicates that the obtained  2 value is greater than the critical value at 0.05 level. Therefore, the frequency of responses of urban teachers, as compared to rural teachers, regarding the statement “they „always‟ offer punishment without being furious” differed significantly in favor of urban teachers. Table 2: Students get reward soon after the good behaviour A O ST AN N Total 2 Urban teachers 232 46.40% 132 26.40% 120 24.00% 11 2.20% 5 1.00% 500 19.25* Rural teachers 301 60.20% 101 20.20% 86 17.20% 8 1.60% 4 0.80% 500 *Significant df=4 2 at 0.05 level = 9.49 Table 2 indicates that the obtained  2 value is greater than the critical value at 0.05 level. Therefore, the frequency of responses of urban and rural teachers regarding the statement “they „always‟ reward students soon after the good behavior” differed significantly in favor of rural teachers. Table 3: Students negative reinforcement immediately after their wrong behaviour A O ST AN N Total 2 Urban teachers 87 17.40% 168 33.60% 159 31.80% 58 11.60% 28 5.60% 500 30.9 * Rural teachers 112 22.40% 183 36.60% 103 20.60% 41 8.20% 61 12.20% 500 *Significant df=4 2 at 0.05 level = 9.49 Table 3 shows that the obtained  2 value is greater than the critical value at 0.05 level. Thus, the frequency of responses of urban and rural teachers regarding the statement “they „never‟ punish students immediately after their wrong behavior” differed significantly in favor of urban teachers. Contemporary Issues In Education Research – January 2010 Volume 3, Number 1 132 Table 4: Equal positive reinforcement to the weak and shining students after their desirable behavior A O ST AN N Total 2 Urban teachers 136 27.20% 242 48.40% 49 9.80% 39 7.80% 34 6.80% 500 84.04* Rural teachers 245 49.00% 120 24.00% 77 15.40% 21 4.20% 37 7.40% 500 *Significant df=4 2 at 0.05 level = 9.49 Table 4 reflects that the obtained  2 value is greater than the critical value at 0.05 level. Thus, the frequency of responses of urban and rural teachers regarding the statement “they „often‟ reward the weak and shining students equally after their desirable behavior” differed significantly in favor of urban teachers. Table 5: Equal negative reinforcement to the weak and bright students after their disruptive behavior A O ST AN N Total 2 Urban teachers 126 25.20% 73 14.60% 108 21.60% 36 7.20% 157 31.40% 500 25.37* Rural teachers 110 22.00% 89 17.80% 138 27.60% 62 12.40% 101 20.20% 500 *Significant df=4 2 at 0.05 level = 9.49 Table 5 indicates that the obtained  2 value is greater than the critical value at 0.05 level. Therefore, the frequency of responses of urban and rural teachers regarding the statement “they „never‟ give equal punishment to the weak and bright students after their disruptive behavior” differed significantly in favor of urban teachers. Table 6: Teachers’ feeling after giving punishment to students A O ST AN N Total 2 Urban teachers 88 17.60% 205 41.00% 52 10.40% 23 4.60% 132 26.40% 500 33.25* Rural teachers 109 21.80% 193 38.60% 85 17.00% 41 8.20% 72 14.40% 500 *Significant df=4 2 at 0.05 level = 9.49 Table 6 shows that the obtained  2 value is greater than the critical value at 0.05 level. Therefore, the frequency of responses of urban and rural teachers regarding the statement “they „never‟ remain calm and cool while giving punishment” differed significantly in favor of urban teachers. Table 7: Punishment is more effective in decreasing undesirable behaviour than reward in increasing desirable behaviour A O ST AN N Total 2 Urban teachers 49 9.80% 153 30.60% 185 37.00% 50 10.00% 63 12.60% 500 15.17* Rural teachers 53 10.60% 114 22.80% 199 39.80% 82 16.40% 52 10.40% 500 *Significant df=4 2 at 0.05 level = 9.49 Table 7 reflects that the obtained  2 value is greater than the critical value at 0.05 level. Hence, the frequency of responses of urban and rural teachers regarding the statement “Punishment is „often‟ more effective in decreasing undesirable behaviour than reward in increasing desirable behaviour differed” significantly in favor of urban teachers. Contemporary Issues In Education Research – January 2010 Volume 3, Number 1 133 Table 8: Use of punishment immediately, consistently and fairly A O ST AN N Total 2 Urban teachers 118 23.60% 187 37.40% 114 22.80% 35 7.00% 46 9.20% 500 21.39* Rural teachers 136 27.20% 139 27.80% 165 33.00% 22 4.40% 38 7.60% 500 *Significant df=4 2 at 0.05 level = 9.49 Table 8 shows that the obtained  2 value is greater than the critical value at 0.05 level. Hence, the frequency of responses of urban and rural teachers regarding the statement “they „sometimes‟ use punishment immediately, consistently and fairly” differed significantly in favor of rural teachers. DISCUSSION The role of education and training is crucial in the Human Resource Development. Education is focused on the training and modification of behavior of human beings accepted in social code. Teachers‟ role is pivotal to modify the behaviors of students by using the positive and negative reinforcement techniques. In Pakistan, teachers normally use punishment as a tool of learning. Most of the teachers had no skill to use positive and negative reinforcement practices in schools. Further, the Pakistani teachers focused on undesirable behaviors and not on concentrating to strengthen the desirable behaviors. The frequency and intensity of punishment was more in boys‟ schools compared to girls‟ schools. Further, it was found that the rural teachers used punishment more frequently than the urban teachers. There was significant difference in the use of reward and punishment in both urban and rural educational institutions. However, it was found that frequency of punishment was much greater than reward, irrespective of geographical and gender dimensions. Analysis and results of the study showed that urban, as well as rural, teachers were found to be defective and having less knowledge of using rewards and deploying punishment in an effective manner so that their results might be fruitful for students. According to the responses of teachers, the majority of urban teachers were found to be better than rural teachers in giving rewards and punishments frequently and effectively. CONCLUSIONS It was concluded from the findings of the study that urban teachers had better knowledge of giving rewards and punishment regarding their frequency as well as effectiveness. Urban teachers showed better results than rural teachers in comparing frequency and effectiveness of rewards and punishment used in government boys‟ and girls‟ secondary schools. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Rural teachers should be given training in using rewards (token system, contingency contract, smile of teacher, etc.) and deploying punishment (extinction, time out, response cost, etc.) in order to make them effective. 2. The research was conducted at the secondary level. Future researches at pre-primary, primary and elementary levels should be done to view the picture from the other side. 3. The questionnaire was used as a research tool. Future researches should be conducted using observational methods to see a more vivid picture. AUTHOR INFORMATION Hukam Dad is currently working as Lecturer Education in Department of Education in National University of Modern Languages in Islamabad Pakistan. Prior to this he served on various administrative posts and as a teacher in Punjab department Pakistan. He has supervised Master and M.Phil dissertations in the several universities of Pakistan. His area of interest is Educational Psychology. He has earned his master and Ph. D degrees from