PCT applied to education

CSGnet Archive CSG1997
1

I saw a description of some education research which strikes me as being
very PCTish. A computer is used to improve the ability of people to
perceive spoken words. The basic idea behind the research is that
certain language and learning disabilities originate from a person's
inability to perceive the formant transitions which signal certain
consonants. The computer is used to say the words much slower than
occurs in ordinary speech. Game situations are created for use by
preschoolers and above. Big changes are reported in speech and language
abilities.

I think this is PCTish because the target of the instruction is to bring
about perceptual ability changes. The web page which describes this
work is: www.ld.ucsf.edu.

The research by Eleanor Gibson, summarized in her book Perceptual
Learning and Development, is also PCTish for the same reason.

···

Subject: PCT applied to education
From: David M. Goldstein
Date: 2/1/97

2

[From Richard Thurman (970203.1630)]

David M. Goldstein 2/1/97

I saw a description of some education research which strikes me as being
very PCTish. A computer is used to improve the ability of people to
perceive spoken words. The basic idea behind the research is that
certain language and learning disabilities originate from a person's
inability to perceive the formant transitions which signal certain
consonants. The computer is used to say the words much slower than
occurs in ordinary speech. Game situations are created for use by
preschoolers and above. Big changes are reported in speech and language
abilities.

Yes -- this was on national (evening) news last year. I was impressed
with the PCT implications. At the time I said to myself (with a big smile
on my face) "now that's PCT in action!" Imagine something so simple as
slowing down the phonemes just enough for students to begin picking up the
relevant perceptions. So simple, so elegant! So PCT!

And Chris, it was computer-based, individualized instruction.

···

------------------------------------------------------------

Bill Powers (970201.0745 MST)]

Bruce Gregory (970201.0735 EST)--

An associate taught a high-school course in physics. In one class he
passed back homework assignments and tests the next day. In the others

he

passed back homework assignments and tests after a week to ten days. He
was dismayed to find that both groups did equally well (or poorly).

Why dismayed? He had found that if there is any benefit from letting the
students see their graded assignments quickly, a delay as short as one

day

is still too long to reveal it.
...

If you really want to study the effect of "delayed feedback" on quality

of

work, you have to explore all delays down to zero, or as close as you can
get to zero. One day is not the minimum possible time. Perhaps the

critical

amount of delay is 10 seconds. One of the data points should involve

having

a student solve one problem, then grading it immediately and handing it
back. Then the next, and so on.

Ray Kulhavey studied "delayed feedback" for a while. He found that
contrary to the Behaviorism's principle of "immediate reinforcement," the
optimal time delay between testing and feedback is about one day. As I
remember, he posited that the delay allowed students more time to forget
the incorrect response. That way the incorrect response would not
interfere with the correct one.

I've done a little research with computer-based drill & practice and the
effect of 'feedback' delays. I don't talk about it much here because it
is all done with "means-based group statistics" and is thus rendered
suspect.

It makes sense that rapid
turnaround would be superior, but he could find no evidence to support

the

notion.

Why should rapid turnaround make any difference? Behind any such

assumption

are others, such as that the students actually try to find their errors

and

re-do the problems until they know they can get the right answer every

time.

If they aren't doing that, then there's no reason to suppose the

turnaround

time will have any effect at all, even if instantaneous. These things

don't

work by magic.

One of the most horrific college classes I ever had was a beginning
statistics course where the professor had rigged the test answer sheet to
give "immediate feedback." You have all seen the 'bubble' answer sheet
where you fill in the correct (A,B,C,D or E) circle with a pencil. Well
this one was just the opposite. On this answer sheet you erased the
filled-in circle. If the answer was correct there was a small dot in the
middle of the circle. If you were incorrect your got nothing. After the
first few incorrect answers (on the same question) you really got
flustered. (Hmm... lets see the correct answer must be "C" erase..erase...
What?! Wrong! ... Ok don't panic, maybe its "E" erase..erase... Argh!
Wrong Again ... Ok you clutched that time -- now think! Then it must be
"B" erase..erase..... You get the picture. By question number two I was
queasy -- by question 25 I was a blathering idiot. (The stat teacher knew
I was an idiot. Its the blathering part that upset him.) That went on at
least once a week all semester.

To this day I can't look a statistics book in the eye without mentally
twitching. So much for "immediate feedback."

Happy twiching
Rich

3

[From Bruce Abbott (970203.2150 EST)]

Richard Thurman (970203.1630) --

One of the most horrific college classes I ever had was a beginning
statistics course where the professor had rigged the test answer sheet to
give "immediate feedback." You have all seen the 'bubble' answer sheet
where you fill in the correct (A,B,C,D or E) circle with a pencil. Well
this one was just the opposite. On this answer sheet you erased the
filled-in circle. If the answer was correct there was a small dot in the
middle of the circle. If you were incorrect your got nothing. After the
first few incorrect answers (on the same question) you really got
flustered. (Hmm... lets see the correct answer must be "C" erase..erase...
What?! Wrong! ... Ok don't panic, maybe its "E" erase..erase... Argh!
Wrong Again ... Ok you clutched that time -- now think! Then it must be
"B" erase..erase..... You get the picture. By question number two I was
queasy -- by question 25 I was a blathering idiot. (The stat teacher knew
I was an idiot. Its the blathering part that upset him.) That went on at
least once a week all semester.

To this day I can't look a statistics book in the eye without mentally
twitching. So much for "immediate feedback."

The problem is that this immediate feedback only informed you of the current
state of your controlled variable (how well you were doing on the test), and
what it indicated is that the CV was departing more and more from your
intended reference. Such "feedback" (perception of the state of the CV)
does no good when there is no means at your immediate disposal to correct
the accumulating error. It's like driving down the highway at 65 mph,
hitting ice, and helplessly watching yourself slide into the oncoming
traffic lane.

That's not the sort of immediate feedback that is beneficial in the classroom.

Compare that to B. F. Skinner's "programmed learning" approach. You are
presented with some information you are to learn and understand, then you
are immediately given a question to answer about the material just
presented. You respond and then you are given immediate feedback of the
type you described -- telling you whether your answer was correct or
incorrect. If the answer is correct, fine, you go on to the next bit of
material. If not, then based on your choice of answer, you are given
additional instruction (and perhaps questions) designed to discover what you
are confused about (or have forgotten) and clarify (or remind). That is,
you are not just told that you made a mistake, you are given the means to
discover the nature of your error and correct it.

Because this correction process is immediate, there is no growing sense of
panic -- the errors are eliminated as they come up, rather than being
allowed to accumulate. In addition, programmed learning breaks the learning
into small, easily mastered steps, so that relatively few errors are
generated in the first place. As a result, the student remains in control
of the CV (the perception of grasp of the material remains near its
reference of "hey, I know this stuff!".

I'm not saying the B. F. saw programmed learning the way I just described it
(in control system terms), but as I see it his approach couldn't have been
more PCTish. Fancy that.

Regards,

Bruce

4

[From Bruce Gregory (900204.1145 EST)]

Richard Thurman (970203.1630)

One of the most horrific college classes I ever had was a beginning
statistics course where the professor had rigged the test answer sheet to
give "immediate feedback." You have all seen the 'bubble' answer sheet
where you fill in the correct (A,B,C,D or E) circle with a pencil. Well
this one was just the opposite. On this answer sheet you erased the
filled-in circle. If the answer was correct there was a small dot in the
middle of the circle. If you were incorrect your got nothing. After the
first few incorrect answers (on the same question) you really got
flustered. (Hmm... lets see the correct answer must be "C" erase..erase...
What?! Wrong! ... Ok don't panic, maybe its "E" erase..erase... Argh!
Wrong Again ... Ok you clutched that time -- now think! Then it must be
"B" erase..erase..... You get the picture. By question number two I was
queasy -- by question 25 I was a blathering idiot. (The stat teacher knew
I was an idiot. Its the blathering part that upset him.) That went on at
least once a week all semester.

To this day I can't look a statistics book in the eye without mentally
twitching. So much for "immediate feedback."

This beautifully captures the experience of "goal switching"
that I associate with immediate feedback. The goal becomes, not
to understand, but to pick the correct answer. This happens to
me when I get antsy playing "freecell" solitaire. I jump from
thinking my way through the moves to guessing a sequence that
will "win". Sometimes it does. More times it doesn't.

Bruce Gregory

5

[From Bruce Gregory (970204.1125)]

Bruce Abbott (970203.2150 EST)

Compare that to B. F. Skinner's "programmed learning" approach. You are
presented with some information you are to learn and understand, then you
are immediately given a question to answer about the material just
presented. You respond and then you are given immediate feedback of the
type you described -- telling you whether your answer was correct or
incorrect. If the answer is correct, fine, you go on to the next bit of
material. If not, then based on your choice of answer, you are given
additional instruction (and perhaps questions) designed to discover what you
are confused about (or have forgotten) and clarify (or remind). That is,
you are not just told that you made a mistake, you are given the means to
discover the nature of your error and correct it.

Because this correction process is immediate, there is no growing sense of
panic -- the errors are eliminated as they come up, rather than being
allowed to accumulate. In addition, programmed learning breaks the learning
into small, easily mastered steps, so that relatively few errors are
generated in the first place. As a result, the student remains in control
of the CV (the perception of grasp of the material remains near its
reference of "hey, I know this stuff!".

I'm not saying the B. F. saw programmed learning the way I just described it
(in control system terms), but as I see it his approach couldn't have been
more PCTish. Fancy that.

I have tried to learn things using programmed learning of this
sort, but I was not successful. In my case at least, I find that
my goal becomes to answer the questions correctly rather than to
learn the material. As a result, I do very well with the
program, but remember nothing of what I have "learned". This may
be a defect in my own neural structuring. Or it may not. This is
experience is why I am not convinced that leading me by the hand
as the computer does, is of permanent value. On the other hand I
_use_ computers to accomplish my own goals all the time. As
affordances they are wonderful (see Bill's comment about the
Internet), as teachers they leave a lot to be desired (also see
Bill's comments).

Bruce Gregory

6

[From Bruce Abbott (970207.1055 EST)]

Richard Thurman (970206.0825) --

Do you catch my drift. Every parent knows that kids need feedback when
they are learning (principle #1). Many teachers have been taught that
they should reinforce correct responses (principle #2). Instructional
principle #1 comes from experience and is correct. Instructional
principle #2 is derived from a flawed explanation of the experience and is
suspect.

Rich, I meant to respond to your earlier post to me but didn't, so I'll take
this opportunity to state that I agree completely. You will note that I
left out Skinner's theoretical constructs when I described his programmed
learning procedure. It is the procedure that makes sense from a
control-system perspective, not the theory that was used to justify it.

The reinforcement concept leads to the prescription that one should use
praise to "reinforce" correct "responses" rather than using criticism to
"punish" incorrect "responses," but the assumption that these actions on the
part of the teacher work automatically to shape appropriate behavior in the
classroom is simply wrong. The PCT notion is that if the student gets it
right, the teacher need do nothing, as there is no error to correct. I say
this on good authority as this is what Rick Marken told me when I asked why
he generally remains silent on statements in my posts with which he agrees.
He said he didn't need to respond, because those statements did not present
disturbances to his CVs. This view seems at odds with what I know about
human nature -- we all like to know that our work is appreciated, that
others understand and agree with our thinking, so long as we perceive the
compliment to be genuine. (Artificial praise is soon recognized for what it
is, which is why naive attempts to use praise as "reinforcement" backfire.)
It's not reinforcement, so what is it? I'd like to hear some discussion of
this issue, as the use of _genuine_ praise seems to be a key component of
successful educational programs. I have some ideas on the matter, but I'd
like to hear from anyone who cares to venture a reply first before I add my
two cents.

Regards,

Bruce

7

[From Bruce Gregory (970207.2115 EST)]

Bruce Abbott (970207.1055 EST)]

I'd like to hear some discussion of
this issue, as the use of _genuine_ praise seems to be a key component of
successful educational programs. I have some ideas on the matter, but I'd
like to hear from anyone who cares to venture a reply first before I add my
two cents.

I suggest you take a look at Alfie Kohn's _Punished by Rewards: The
trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A's praise, and other bribes._.
You may find there is less evidence for the importance of praise,
genuine or other, than you may believe.

Bruce Gregory

8

I've been quietly reading the information about PCT and education. My
name is Dennis Dunlap and I am the founder of a alternative choice for
student's who haven't been successful in the traditional system. We
have been working with Ed Ford's RTC for the past two years and have
had great success.

I have been looking for something, (curriculum or some way to give
students the experiences for their high school diploma). This
something would need to include benchmarks for mastery and students
would need to become proficient on the High School Proficiency Test.
I feel that we have students working in books and dittos, which have
no relevance or rigor to the world they will encounter when they
complete their educational experience. I have an opportunity to
completely reorganize our system at Odyssey. We have been using
Analyze and Apply to inhance our current curriculum. A & A is work
related with work place situations which require the students to
produce a product or several products.

I have been trapped because students see me as a principal, (which I
never thought would happen). The students are now dealing with me
based on their experiences of a principal. Guess how they are dealing
with me???

I'm blowing off steam, but I would like to develop a program for
students in which they could have more control, or maybe they really
don't want the control, because then they would have to be responsible
for success and for failure. Our student's tend to perceive us as the
one's who are responsible for their success and more than not their
failure.

Any help on the development of a student's high school experience and
what that could look like.

Thanks ddunlap

9

[From Bruce Gregory (970211.1000 EST)]

Dennis Dunlap

I'm blowing off steam, but I would like to develop a program for
students in which they could have more control, or maybe they really
don't want the control, because then they would have to be responsible
for success and for failure.

Don't worry. Every wants to be able to control their perceptions
(including e. coli bacteria!).

Our student's tend to perceive us as the
one's who are responsible for their success and more than not their
failure.

Probably because we have set that role for ourselves. They have
chosen to exercise control in those area where they perceive
that they _can_ exercise control. When we relinquish our efforts
to control their behavior to match our pictured, perhaps we
create the opening they need.

Bruce Gregory