Keystone of Comprehending Human Behavior Gone Awry
Nancy Lee Gray
A Paper Presented in Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements of
ED7700 Learning Theory and the Educational Process
March 14, 2004
Abstract
Child maltreatment as a family-culture and environmental factor during development, with its concurrent psychosocial aspects as influential to early human learning, and subsequent learning within a school-culture and environment is examined through existing literature. Research indicates the links between parenting beliefs and parent-child relationships are the only statistically significant predictor to children's mastery levels. Never the less, research is not yet focused on child maltreatment as a significant factor within that paradigm. The possible links between early child maltreatment and early learning are examined within the context of various learning theories of behaviorism, cognitivism, and motivation and memory. Potential links between that early learning and subsequent learning difficulties within the school-culture environment are posited in the same context of learning theories.
Table of Contents
Introduction 4
Behaviorism 13
Cognitivism 22
Memory and Motivation 29
Conclusion 42
Reference 46
An Understanding of Human Learning:
Keystone of Comprehending Human Behavior Gone Awry
The hum and buzz of the crowded room turns instantly to silence as though someone yelled FREEZE! during an impromptu game of statues. No one moves. No one breathes. All eyes turn towards the chair just thrown down across the room. A high-pitched NO! shatters the silence. The four-year-old screamer kicks a chair, hurls another to the floor, sweeps art supplies from the table.
"It's your fault," she yells, as she lunges at a nearby child still frozen in his place.
"Not a good day for Misty," mutters the aide as she steps between the children. The near-victim scurries away toward shelter behind the Head Start teacher. He intends to live another day. For Misty the decision is more complex.
Tensed arms cross in determined self-protective hunch, eyes squint with intent to survive any challenge, mouth pinches and distorts as if from some gut-wrenching pain from unseen wounds, as the child breathes with the quick sharp snorts of a cornered bull. Unblinking, she returns the unfathomed, unsteady, puzzled gaze of the aide. Helplessness holds them fast. The red flag hangs momentarily suspended between them.
Seized by the drama of the moment, captured by demands to quickly restore an environment more conducive to learning, imprisoned by ignorance of yesterday's learning as the keystone to today's learning, few recognize the child's palpable fear that her survival is at risk. This failure can be rectified by increasing understanding of the effects on children's learning within "family-cultural environments" that include maltreatment of the children or other members of the family.
Those who choose to learn about this environment will soon note a "foreign" language learned in a family culture of violence or neglect known to result in behavior problems and aggression,(Levendosky, Huth-Bocks, Shapiro, & Semel, 2003). They will acknowledge an environment that models the "tendency to become highly self-critical when confronted with negative feedback (e.g., criticism from others; perception of doing poorly on a task(Kistner, Ziegert, Castro, & Robertson, 2001) that results in a "correlation between a child's low efficacy and higher help avoidance behavior,(Dweck, 1986; Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Elliot & Dweck, 1988; in Ryan, Green, & Midgley, 1998.) They will recognize patterns that multiply the chances for ever increasing inappropriate behaviors in a child's attempt to salvage whatever remnants of self-worth remain. (Covington, 1992, 1998; Covington & Omelich, 1979 in Ormrod). And they will accept that children do not acquire the capacity to understand "that they and others can have false beliefs" (Alison Gopnik and Janet Astington, 1988), until around age 4, (Perner et al., 1992) so attempts to alter a young child's behaviors through that avenue are fraught with frustration for all.
Ridiculed by the jeering crowd, taunted by the matador, the bull, already exhausted, weakened and in pain, bleeding from wounds inflicted by the picadors, expects no help, and seeks none. To move is to die. But the matador moves. The gleaming sword raised overhead plunges down, appears to meet its target. The bull staggers, falls to the ground. The audience roars its approval, forgetting the bull never had a fighting chance to begin with. Maltreated children's odds are not any greater.
Frustrated, enraged, in pain and uncomprehending, the maltreated infant lacking any known means to modify the environment, much like the wounded bull still alive through the hands of the inept matador, bellows and thrashes about without cognitive intent. Some maltreated children retain this response. Others are actually clinically depressed. Their behaviors come across as defiant. The children are "saying something to you when they act like that, but instead of seeing what the behavior is saying, we punish it."(Hurst, 2004). Or we attempt to change behaviors on the surface for our immediate benefit without regard to the long-term outcome for the child. We choose.
With the bull down, the matador turns expectantly toward the silent crowd. Now they will decide. Not pity, not empathy not sympathy will determine their will. If the downed bull fought fiercely and with valor, proved himself a worthy adversary to his opponent, a thunderous roar of approval will signal their choice. The bull is given the chance to live. He will receive every assistance to do so. His strength of spirit will determine the rest.
As the bull appeared to give up, may have even participated through its failure to take any action to avoid its own destruction, so, too, do some children seem to make choices that contribute to their own destruction academically and socially. Lacking a healthy "help-seeking" behavior that would combine "aspects of cognitive and social engagement" as part of an effective "learning strategy and social interaction with others,"(Ryan, Gheen, & Midgley, 1998), the child is at-risk for resorting to early learned behaviors in response to present stimuli.
For some maltreated young children, any natural inclination towards goal-seeking relief disappears into a learned helplessness that surfaces whenever the child feels thwarted or endangered. Research indicates no significant gender differences "related to helplessness" among children. (Kistner et al., 2001). Whether boy or girl, the maltreated child responds as he or she has learned to do through his or her perceived personal experience. To make a sound is to be noticed. To move is to risk death.
This "early emergence of helplessness" in boys or girls, with its attendant negative consequences may be "particularly pernicious, with negative implications for children's psychological adjustment."(Kistner et al., 2001). There is no scientifically based reason to believe it will have positive implications for any academic or later life adjustments either.
The cries, salient or silent, of maltreated children who haven't yet given up all hope of being heard by the time they enter the academic community and culture are often lost in the cacophonous "noise" of disparate, competing professional theories, dissenting research conclusions, amateur "instincts" of many on dealing with children. The surrounding din includes thinly veiled lies and deceit by "caregivers" too ashamed or afraid to admit what goes on behind closed doors. Sound walls erected with the denials and excuses of professionals required by law in the 50 states plus Washington DC, to report suspected child maltreatment, but fail to do so, grow higher. In fact, although researchers believe teachers are in the best position to report, eighty-four percent of cases identified in schools are never reported. (Kesner & Robinson, 2002; Sechrist, 2000; U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2003)
The infant's natural enough sense of helplessness that sometimes serves him well for learning to survive in the home-culture environment grows into the maltreated child's learned helplessness or manifests as inappropriate and frequently aggressive behaviors.
Ameliorating the effects of learning gone awry, mediating between the family-culture and environment that served as spawning ground for inappropriate behaviors, and facilitating opportunities for development of more socially established, effective ways to behave become goals for many academic professionals. Their efforts are directed and focused. Their intentions are good… good enough to pave the way to hell. Their results abysmal.
Unfortunately, the belief that the child is free to choose another way of being belies the basis for the early learning for maltreated children that choice is often dangerous. Freedom is an illusion at best. Chances for survival frequently increase in direct proportion to doing nothing…or at best doing nothing significantly different from the already-known-to-be-safe behaviors learned the hard way.
Motivation and self-regulated task behavior affect "early school achievement differences among young, economically at-risk and not-at-risk children."(Howse, Lange, Farran, & Boyles, 2003) Research also supports the idea that "family variables contribute to the development of motivational patterns and influence academic success." (Turner & Johnson, 2003). Additionally, research indicates "children from economically disadvantaged family-cultures lack adequate scholastic skills and are considered at greater risk for school failure than their affluent peers." (e.g., Alexander & Entwistle, 1988; Goldenberg, Reese, & Gallimore, 1992; Jordan, Huttenlocher, & Levine, 1992; St. Pierre & Layzer, 1998; Stipek & Ryan, 1997 in Howse, Lange, Farran, & Boyles, 2003). But child maltreatment knows no boundaries, is found among "all segments of society, regardless of ethnicity, socioeconomic status, geographic locale, religious belief, or the age of the perpetrator." (Gullatt & Stockton, 2000)
Never the less, few research studies exist of these relationships with later "school-related behaviors…learning processes…poor school readiness…and low achievement profiles of at-risk children." (Howse et al., 2003) And few studies exist that explore child maltreatment as a factor that may equal or surpass the others in determining school-related behaviors, and subsequent plans for modifying behaviors for preschool students and beyond.
When faced with inappropriate behaviors, some educators may ask, "What's wrong with this child?"
Others may ask, "How can we motivate this child to change, empower this child to strive for success?"
Those who seek to make a difference may take workshops, participate in seminars, read and study with sincere intent to learn how best to change the children to increase their odds for success. They ask their questions with intent to find answers, but the answers seldom work as expected if the source of the child's behaviors is rooted in maltreatment.
Perhaps in order to receive answers that do work, the questions should change direction; might ask for example: what elements of the original learning environment, the child's "home-culture," led to the development and maintenance of the behaviors exhibited by this child? What can be learned from the child's "self-initiated actions on and interactions with the environment?"(Odom & Wolery, 2003). What changes to the academic learning environment can contribute to an alternative that enables this child to thrive and develop in new directions? What adult mediations of the children's experiences will "promote learning?" (Horn, Lieber, Li, Sandall, & Schwartz, 2000; Losardo & Bricker, 1994; Wolery et al., 1998; Davis et al., 1994; Venn et al., 1993; in Odom & Wolery, 2003) Who can best assist the child in learning new uses for whatever strengths have already developed? What means of communication will enable the child to ask for help in modifying weaknesses that can only serve in his or her own destruction. Where and how does one begin?
This paper examines the problem of child maltreatment as a family-culture and environmental factor with its "psychosocial aspects" as influential to human learning (Serpell, Sonnenschein, Baker, & Ganapathy, 2002). Implications for academically at-risk children entering school are considered within the context of the probability of on-going maltreatment and unchanged home/family cultures.
Parent(s) cooperation is presumed not available, as is so often claimed by teachers of at-risk children.(Leroy & Symes, 2001)Never the less, parents' influence is not absent. According to Turner and Johnson, "the parent-child relationship was the only statistically significant predictor of links between parenting beliefs and parent-child relationships to children's mastery." (Turner & Johnson, 2003). In spite of that finding, little if any research takes that factor into the realm of a parent-child relationship of maltreatment and its link to children's mastery.
Accepting that link as a high probability for the basis of this discussion, possible connections between the learning of the early years within a parent child relationship as it relates to inappropriate school behaviors and failure of young children to achieve expected mastery are considered from various perspectives of learning through concepts related to behaviorism, cognitivism, motivation and memory.
Opportunities for the at-risk child to flourish within alternative environments as they might be restructured and reconstructed within the existing academic culture and environment are suggested. A base-line theory for providing a real chance for the maltreated child to capitalize on his or her strength of spirit is offered as a starting point for future directions of research.
Behaviorism
The child, Misty, during her first three years of life learned primarily through a series of stimulus-response experiences she can't tell you about. Each year over five million reports are made to Child Protective Services Agencies. Over twenty-seven percent of the yearly one million officially designated victims of maltreatment are aged birth to three. Over fifty percent suffered neglect, eighteen percent were physically abused, nine percent were sexually abused and twenty six percent were associated with additional types of maltreatment, including "abandonment," "threats of harm," and "congenital drug addiction." (U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2003)
Each day, three to five children die from child maltreatment in the United States. Nearly half of them are younger than one year old. Nearly eighty-five percent were younger than six. (U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2003). These sad statistics don't tell the whole story. The majority of maltreatment victims survive. They have no voice with which to speak. Sometimes their stories make the news. Most of the time they live on in silence, witness-less victims of what one author calls "soul murder." (Shumba, 2002) Silent, or otherwise, these children are learning from their experience, from the stimuli of their lives, and later when they enter Kindergarten, their responses to other stimuli tell plenty. To those who choose to listen the children's behaviors will tell much of what they learned.
For behaviorists, learning is a fairly permanent change in an organism's behavior, caused by an outside occurrence, identified through observation of the overt effect on the organism, objectively measurable, and modifiable by others. The environment, according to behaviorists, acts as a stimulus that affects the organism. The organism responds. Learning is the observable change in the behavior. (Ormrod)
At the baseline of behaviorism, learning is either an unintended consequence resulting from an uncalculated encounter, as for the maltreated child in his or her infancy, toddler hood, and pre-school years, or learning is a predetermined objective resulting from contrivance in the educational culture that follows when he or she enters an institution of formal education. The organism, according to this perspective, is an unwitting object in either scenario, a receptacle or victim depending on factors totally unrelated to its being or doing. According to behaviorists the principles of learning have equipotentiality to all species. (Ormrod) Therefore, the assumption is made that the principles apply to all young humans of varying potential developing in diverse environments as well. The principles also depend on an objectivity that is promulgated on studies using stimuli and responses, excluding any internal processes, and including an overt behavior change. Where humans are concerned, such studies do not include the kinds of stimuli maltreated children experience. The law does not allow it.
What is known about aversive stimuli with the young is based on animal studies. Abandoning, neglecting, or abusing an infant effects "actual structural changes" on the brain that "last a lifetime." (Nemeroff, 1998)in (Maisel, 2002) For purposes of discussion Maisel's assumption that those structural changes and their lasting effects also occur in maltreated children is accepted. They are "biologically altered in such a way that life becomes dark." The maltreated infant develops a "toxic brain structure." His or her neurons are "at the ready to overreact to stress and to see the glass not as half-empty but as completely empty and impossible to fill."(Maisel, p. 20). Recent brain imaging on adults who were maltreated as children reinforce this concept. They clearly show abnormalities and changes in the brains not seen in those not maltreated. While examining learning theories as they may relate to maltreated children, this growing body of information needs to be considered in context.
In general, theories based on Behaviorist learning principles are most useful when they are concise. The applications based on the theories are most useful when they, too, are concise. As much as possible, the information relating to maltreated children will be kept concise as well, containing limited factual, theoretical and anecdotal information. Those seeking additional information will find it readily available today, unlike thirty years ago when child maltreatment officially entered the educational scene with the U.S. Congress passage of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act in 1974.
In Behaviorism, the organism is seen as a blank tablet, a Tabula Rasa, on which learning is "written" as the record of environmental occurrences, often beyond its control, to which the organism is exposed.(Ormrod, 2004). However, unlike theories based on learning principles, these "records" are not necessarily concise or useful, either. The "records" of the maltreated child are far more complex than those of an organism objectively observed within a carefully contrived environment, subject to the application of specific, theoretically based learning principles… concise, consistent and controlled stimuli and response relationships. For the maltreated child the environment may be more akin to the amorphous semi-soft Jello released from the confines of its container than to the geometric black box suggested by behaviorist theory.
One moment there are stimuli, eliciting the same response as the day before, in the next moment, the same stimuli is without relationship to the expected response, or new stimuli appear to which the child seeks ineffectively to respond with whatever behaviors are developmentally possible. One time, Mom scoops up the infant child and smothers him in kisses. The next time, in a rage, she scoops him up, screams and shakes him, throws him into a crib. The next time she picks him up his behavior seems erratic. He stiffens and screams as she attempts to give him his bottle.
One moment there is the unlimited, unfettered, unstructured freedom without internal or external boundaries of the neglected child, the next moment the environment is restrictive, the child's responses thwarted from every direction. The toddler, hungry and unsupervised as Dad watches the game, climbs onto counters and eats whatever she finds. Depending on his mood she is laughed at for her behavior, or punished. Later, Dad leaves her, hungry and strapped in her car seat while he runs in the bar for a "quick one" with friends, only to return hours later, gushing with concern over her tearful condition. Subsequent attempts to put her into a car seat result in aggressive behaviors as she tries to avoid a recurrence. She may also begin exhibiting the same aggressive behavior at any attempt to put her in any seat, including her high chair at the table. Later in preschool she may refuse to sit for snacks, lunch, even activities, and exhibit aggressive behaviors towards anyone attempting to modify that behavior.
Classical conditioning involves the learning of involuntary responses and attitudes, after one or more pairings. (Ormrod, 2004). The maltreated child, whether abused or neglected, learns from many "pairings" that initially elicit involuntary responses. Over time, the repetitions and inconsistencies create a complex web of behaviors that at least often appear irrational or bizarre to others, and at most suggest to others a demand that the behaviors be changed. The "records" for these children are never as clear as some would like.
Given this situation what can the aide or teacher attempt when confronted with inappropriate classroom behaviors. Extinction, the disappearance of a Conditioned Response, is one possibility for behavioral change, as in the stiffening and screaming of the abused child when touched by the Conditioned Stimulus, a consistently comforting daycare provider, who is repeatedly presented without the unconditioned stimulus, the mother, is unpredictable and yet is frequently the basis for expecting modifications of behaviors in children at the PreK level. However, even when it occurs. Spontaneous recovery, the recurrence of the Conditioned Response when a period of extinction is followed by rest period, is common.
Higher Order Conditioning, a complex form of learning that depends on a neutral stimulus, paired with an unconditioned stimulus elicits an unconditioned response, is another possibility. For example, the car-seat victim is identified as enjoying story time at preschool. She is provided a new and different "seat," on an oversized cuddly bear strapped to a child's chair on which she only sits at story time. After she reaches a state of responding to the cuddly-bear on a chair with comfort and eager delight at story time, the cuddly-bear chair is brought to the table when her favorite snack is offered.
Extinguishing undesirable responses is an important aspect of learning theories based on classical conditioning. Unfortunately, the speed of accomplishing this is unpredictable, especially when inconsistency in the Conditioned Stimulus and Unconditioned Stimulus pairing is a factor. Another factor that affects extinction involves the tendency to avoid feared stimulus, which minimizes the chance of experiencing Conditioned Stimulus without Unconditioned Stimulus. The maltreated child is subject to have experienced many unidentified and little suspected-as-feared stimuli, which increases their tendency to avoid anything new, frustrates those who attempt to manipulate them into something new. And, as indicated, even with some positive results, spontaneous recovery of the Conditioned Response is also possible.
Counter conditioning by replacing one Conditioned Response with a "more desirable, productive" response is another method. Systematic desensitization is usually more effective than extinction as a means for changing inappropriate responses. The process includes identifying an incompatible response, a stimulus that elicits the incompatible response, and a gradual introduction of the new stimulus to the organism.
For John Watson (1913), who believed "past experience accounts for virtually all behavior," nurture, not nature is the deciding factor in learning.(Ormrod, 2004).
Clark Hull offers a more organismic view that posits certain characteristics are unique to different individuals. These include which rewards are deemed important by an individual, the motivation and incentive concepts included in the learning, intervening variables [habit strength, organism's drive, stimulus intensity, inhibitory factors] that affect "likelihood and strength of a response's occurrence" and "habit-family hierarchy."
One child, consistently beaten with any thing handy to the moment, may exhibit similar behaviors to another who experiences corporal punishment infrequently but is punished with situations deemed to fit the child's "crimes" as in burning a child for playing with matches, feigned abandonment of him for not coming when told, or being closed in a dark closet for playing with light switches. In such situations it matters little whether the learning is identified as occurring through "positive" or "negative" reinforcement… the results, in terms of effect in later learning situations, is negative. The reinforcers, due to the unknown and underlying experiences may differ broadly from child to child, however.
Even though material reinforcers can be tangible objects such as food, trinkets and toys, for the maltreated child those same objects may also be objects of abuse, sources of neglect. Children have been force-fed until they choke into unconsciousness to "teach them to eat" or so they "learn" they "eat like pigs" and need to change eating behaviors. Destruction of favorite toys is used as means for psychological power, trinkets used as bribery to ensure the child's silence or cooperation in sexual abuse activities.
Social reinforcers such as gestures and signs that show positive regard may also have distorted meanings for maltreated children. A pat on the head may be a precursor to hair pulling or lifting a child by the hair to "get his attention." Activity reinforcers are opportunities to engage in a favorite activity, but for the maltreated child may trigger anxieties related to occasions when doing the activity related to one horror or another. Positive feedback informs "which responses are desirable and which are not," but may lack sufficient power to reinforce consistently if the maltreated child's experiences include sarcasm as a precursor to violence or other negative events as in praising a child for sharing a treat with a sibling, only to then be put down by being "reminded" that she is "always so selfish" that she should give the other half of the treat away to make up for it.
Intrinsic reinforcers are internal good feelings. Maltreated children may have few opportunities to experience them, or again may have experienced them in ways that lead to what others consider irrational expectations as is the case for children who frequently or even consistently "learn" that feeling good is only an invitation to abuse or neglect of one type or another to follow in short order and from the least likely direction.
Additionally, whereas timing, magnitude, appeal and consistency generally do influence the effectiveness of reinforcers, for maltreated children these factors, too, are apt to be fraught with unknown, unexpected and uncommon negative connections. One child's father was inclined to wake her and her sister, in the middle of the night, hold a gun to her head while accusing her of some "crime," imaginary or otherwise, and ask "Do you want me to kill you now, or later?" He'd leave the room laughing, then greet them in the morning with a favorite breakfast, pancakes and syrup, as though the nightmare of the night before had never happened.
Unfortunately, whereas Behaviorist learning theories explain much about the undesirable behaviors educators would like to modify or change, behaviorist-based methods aren't very effective with maltreated children.
Cognitivism
Table of Contents
Introduction 4
Behaviorism 13
Cognitivism 22
Memory and Motivation 29
Conclusion 42
Reference 46
An Understanding of Human Learning:
Keystone of Comprehending Human Behavior Gone Awry
The hum and buzz of the crowded room turns instantly to silence as though someone yelled FREEZE! during an impromptu game of statues. No one moves. No one breathes. All eyes turn towards the chair just thrown down across the room. A high-pitched NO! shatters the silence. The four-year-old screamer kicks a chair, hurls another to the floor, sweeps art supplies from the table.
"It's your fault," she yells, as she lunges at a nearby child still frozen in his place.
"Not a good day for Misty," mutters the aide as she steps between the children. The near-victim scurries away toward shelter behind the Head Start teacher. He intends to live another day. For Misty the decision is more complex.
Tensed arms cross in determined self-protective hunch, eyes squint with intent to survive any challenge, mouth pinches and distorts as if from some gut-wrenching pain from unseen wounds, as the child breathes with the quick sharp snorts of a cornered bull. Unblinking, she returns the unfathomed, unsteady, puzzled gaze of the aide. Helplessness holds them fast. The red flag hangs momentarily suspended between them.
Seized by the drama of the moment, captured by demands to quickly restore an environment more conducive to learning, imprisoned by ignorance of yesterday's learning as the keystone to today's learning, few recognize the child's palpable fear that her survival is at risk. This failure can be rectified by increasing understanding of the effects on children's learning within "family-cultural environments" that include maltreatment of the children or other members of the family.
Those who choose to learn about this environment will soon note a "foreign" language learned in a family culture of violence or neglect known to result in behavior problems and aggression,(Levendosky, Huth-Bocks, Shapiro, & Semel, 2003). They will acknowledge an environment that models the "tendency to become highly self-critical when confronted with negative feedback (e.g., criticism from others; perception of doing poorly on a task(Kistner, Ziegert, Castro, & Robertson, 2001) that results in a "correlation between a child's low efficacy and higher help avoidance behavior,(Dweck, 1986; Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Elliot & Dweck, 1988; in Ryan, Green, & Midgley, 1998.) They will recognize patterns that multiply the chances for ever increasing inappropriate behaviors in a child's attempt to salvage whatever remnants of self-worth remain. (Covington, 1992, 1998; Covington & Omelich, 1979 in Ormrod). And they will accept that children do not acquire the capacity to understand "that they and others can have false beliefs" (Alison Gopnik and Janet Astington, 1988), until around age 4, (Perner et al., 1992) so attempts to alter a young child's behaviors through that avenue are fraught with frustration for all.
Ridiculed by the jeering crowd, taunted by the matador, the bull, already exhausted, weakened and in pain, bleeding from wounds inflicted by the picadors, expects no help, and seeks none. To move is to die. But the matador moves. The gleaming sword raised overhead plunges down, appears to meet its target. The bull staggers, falls to the ground. The audience roars its approval, forgetting the bull never had a fighting chance to begin with. Maltreated children's odds are not any greater.
Frustrated, enraged, in pain and uncomprehending, the maltreated infant lacking any known means to modify the environment, much like the wounded bull still alive through the hands of the inept matador, bellows and thrashes about without cognitive intent. Some maltreated children retain this response. Others are actually clinically depressed. Their behaviors come across as defiant. The children are "saying something to you when they act like that, but instead of seeing what the behavior is saying, we punish it."(Hurst, 2004). Or we attempt to change behaviors on the surface for our immediate benefit without regard to the long-term outcome for the child. We choose.
With the bull down, the matador turns expectantly toward the silent crowd. Now they will decide. Not pity, not empathy not sympathy will determine their will. If the downed bull fought fiercely and with valor, proved himself a worthy adversary to his opponent, a thunderous roar of approval will signal their choice. The bull is given the chance to live. He will receive every assistance to do so. His strength of spirit will determine the rest.
As the bull appeared to give up, may have even participated through its failure to take any action to avoid its own destruction, so, too, do some children seem to make choices that contribute to their own destruction academically and socially. Lacking a healthy "help-seeking" behavior that would combine "aspects of cognitive and social engagement" as part of an effective "learning strategy and social interaction with others,"(Ryan, Gheen, & Midgley, 1998), the child is at-risk for resorting to early learned behaviors in response to present stimuli.
For some maltreated young children, any natural inclination towards goal-seeking relief disappears into a learned helplessness that surfaces whenever the child feels thwarted or endangered. Research indicates no significant gender differences "related to helplessness" among children. (Kistner et al., 2001). Whether boy or girl, the maltreated child responds as he or she has learned to do through his or her perceived personal experience. To make a sound is to be noticed. To move is to risk death.
This "early emergence of helplessness" in boys or girls, with its attendant negative consequences may be "particularly pernicious, with negative implications for children's psychological adjustment."(Kistner et al., 2001). There is no scientifically based reason to believe it will have positive implications for any academic or later life adjustments either.
The cries, salient or silent, of maltreated children who haven't yet given up all hope of being heard by the time they enter the academic community and culture are often lost in the cacophonous "noise" of disparate, competing professional theories, dissenting research conclusions, amateur "instincts" of many on dealing with children. The surrounding din includes thinly veiled lies and deceit by "caregivers" too ashamed or afraid to admit what goes on behind closed doors. Sound walls erected with the denials and excuses of professionals required by law in the 50 states plus Washington DC, to report suspected child maltreatment, but fail to do so, grow higher. In fact, although researchers believe teachers are in the best position to report, eighty-four percent of cases identified in schools are never reported. (Kesner & Robinson, 2002; Sechrist, 2000; U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2003)
The infant's natural enough sense of helplessness that sometimes serves him well for learning to survive in the home-culture environment grows into the maltreated child's learned helplessness or manifests as inappropriate and frequently aggressive behaviors.
Ameliorating the effects of learning gone awry, mediating between the family-culture and environment that served as spawning ground for inappropriate behaviors, and facilitating opportunities for development of more socially established, effective ways to behave become goals for many academic professionals. Their efforts are directed and focused. Their intentions are good… good enough to pave the way to hell. Their results abysmal.
Unfortunately, the belief that the child is free to choose another way of being belies the basis for the early learning for maltreated children that choice is often dangerous. Freedom is an illusion at best. Chances for survival frequently increase in direct proportion to doing nothing…or at best doing nothing significantly different from the already-known-to-be-safe behaviors learned the hard way.
Motivation and self-regulated task behavior affect "early school achievement differences among young, economically at-risk and not-at-risk children."(Howse, Lange, Farran, & Boyles, 2003) Research also supports the idea that "family variables contribute to the development of motivational patterns and influence academic success." (Turner & Johnson, 2003). Additionally, research indicates "children from economically disadvantaged family-cultures lack adequate scholastic skills and are considered at greater risk for school failure than their affluent peers." (e.g., Alexander & Entwistle, 1988; Goldenberg, Reese, & Gallimore, 1992; Jordan, Huttenlocher, & Levine, 1992; St. Pierre & Layzer, 1998; Stipek & Ryan, 1997 in Howse, Lange, Farran, & Boyles, 2003). But child maltreatment knows no boundaries, is found among "all segments of society, regardless of ethnicity, socioeconomic status, geographic locale, religious belief, or the age of the perpetrator." (Gullatt & Stockton, 2000)
Never the less, few research studies exist of these relationships with later "school-related behaviors…learning processes…poor school readiness…and low achievement profiles of at-risk children." (Howse et al., 2003) And few studies exist that explore child maltreatment as a factor that may equal or surpass the others in determining school-related behaviors, and subsequent plans for modifying behaviors for preschool students and beyond.
When faced with inappropriate behaviors, some educators may ask, "What's wrong with this child?"
Others may ask, "How can we motivate this child to change, empower this child to strive for success?"
Those who seek to make a difference may take workshops, participate in seminars, read and study with sincere intent to learn how best to change the children to increase their odds for success. They ask their questions with intent to find answers, but the answers seldom work as expected if the source of the child's behaviors is rooted in maltreatment.
Perhaps in order to receive answers that do work, the questions should change direction; might ask for example: what elements of the original learning environment, the child's "home-culture," led to the development and maintenance of the behaviors exhibited by this child? What can be learned from the child's "self-initiated actions on and interactions with the environment?"(Odom & Wolery, 2003). What changes to the academic learning environment can contribute to an alternative that enables this child to thrive and develop in new directions? What adult mediations of the children's experiences will "promote learning?" (Horn, Lieber, Li, Sandall, & Schwartz, 2000; Losardo & Bricker, 1994; Wolery et al., 1998; Davis et al., 1994; Venn et al., 1993; in Odom & Wolery, 2003) Who can best assist the child in learning new uses for whatever strengths have already developed? What means of communication will enable the child to ask for help in modifying weaknesses that can only serve in his or her own destruction. Where and how does one begin?
This paper examines the problem of child maltreatment as a family-culture and environmental factor with its "psychosocial aspects" as influential to human learning (Serpell, Sonnenschein, Baker, & Ganapathy, 2002). Implications for academically at-risk children entering school are considered within the context of the probability of on-going maltreatment and unchanged home/family cultures.
Parent(s) cooperation is presumed not available, as is so often claimed by teachers of at-risk children.(Leroy & Symes, 2001)Never the less, parents' influence is not absent. According to Turner and Johnson, "the parent-child relationship was the only statistically significant predictor of links between parenting beliefs and parent-child relationships to children's mastery." (Turner & Johnson, 2003). In spite of that finding, little if any research takes that factor into the realm of a parent-child relationship of maltreatment and its link to children's mastery.
Accepting that link as a high probability for the basis of this discussion, possible connections between the learning of the early years within a parent child relationship as it relates to inappropriate school behaviors and failure of young children to achieve expected mastery are considered from various perspectives of learning through concepts related to behaviorism, cognitivism, motivation and memory.
Opportunities for the at-risk child to flourish within alternative environments as they might be restructured and reconstructed within the existing academic culture and environment are suggested. A base-line theory for providing a real chance for the maltreated child to capitalize on his or her strength of spirit is offered as a starting point for future directions of research.
Behaviorism
The child, Misty, during her first three years of life learned primarily through a series of stimulus-response experiences she can't tell you about. Each year over five million reports are made to Child Protective Services Agencies. Over twenty-seven percent of the yearly one million officially designated victims of maltreatment are aged birth to three. Over fifty percent suffered neglect, eighteen percent were physically abused, nine percent were sexually abused and twenty six percent were associated with additional types of maltreatment, including "abandonment," "threats of harm," and "congenital drug addiction." (U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2003)
Each day, three to five children die from child maltreatment in the United States. Nearly half of them are younger than one year old. Nearly eighty-five percent were younger than six. (U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2003). These sad statistics don't tell the whole story. The majority of maltreatment victims survive. They have no voice with which to speak. Sometimes their stories make the news. Most of the time they live on in silence, witness-less victims of what one author calls "soul murder." (Shumba, 2002) Silent, or otherwise, these children are learning from their experience, from the stimuli of their lives, and later when they enter Kindergarten, their responses to other stimuli tell plenty. To those who choose to listen the children's behaviors will tell much of what they learned.
For behaviorists, learning is a fairly permanent change in an organism's behavior, caused by an outside occurrence, identified through observation of the overt effect on the organism, objectively measurable, and modifiable by others. The environment, according to behaviorists, acts as a stimulus that affects the organism. The organism responds. Learning is the observable change in the behavior. (Ormrod)
At the baseline of behaviorism, learning is either an unintended consequence resulting from an uncalculated encounter, as for the maltreated child in his or her infancy, toddler hood, and pre-school years, or learning is a predetermined objective resulting from contrivance in the educational culture that follows when he or she enters an institution of formal education. The organism, according to this perspective, is an unwitting object in either scenario, a receptacle or victim depending on factors totally unrelated to its being or doing. According to behaviorists the principles of learning have equipotentiality to all species. (Ormrod) Therefore, the assumption is made that the principles apply to all young humans of varying potential developing in diverse environments as well. The principles also depend on an objectivity that is promulgated on studies using stimuli and responses, excluding any internal processes, and including an overt behavior change. Where humans are concerned, such studies do not include the kinds of stimuli maltreated children experience. The law does not allow it.
What is known about aversive stimuli with the young is based on animal studies. Abandoning, neglecting, or abusing an infant effects "actual structural changes" on the brain that "last a lifetime." (Nemeroff, 1998)in (Maisel, 2002) For purposes of discussion Maisel's assumption that those structural changes and their lasting effects also occur in maltreated children is accepted. They are "biologically altered in such a way that life becomes dark." The maltreated infant develops a "toxic brain structure." His or her neurons are "at the ready to overreact to stress and to see the glass not as half-empty but as completely empty and impossible to fill."(Maisel, p. 20). Recent brain imaging on adults who were maltreated as children reinforce this concept. They clearly show abnormalities and changes in the brains not seen in those not maltreated. While examining learning theories as they may relate to maltreated children, this growing body of information needs to be considered in context.
In general, theories based on Behaviorist learning principles are most useful when they are concise. The applications based on the theories are most useful when they, too, are concise. As much as possible, the information relating to maltreated children will be kept concise as well, containing limited factual, theoretical and anecdotal information. Those seeking additional information will find it readily available today, unlike thirty years ago when child maltreatment officially entered the educational scene with the U.S. Congress passage of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act in 1974.
In Behaviorism, the organism is seen as a blank tablet, a Tabula Rasa, on which learning is "written" as the record of environmental occurrences, often beyond its control, to which the organism is exposed.(Ormrod, 2004). However, unlike theories based on learning principles, these "records" are not necessarily concise or useful, either. The "records" of the maltreated child are far more complex than those of an organism objectively observed within a carefully contrived environment, subject to the application of specific, theoretically based learning principles… concise, consistent and controlled stimuli and response relationships. For the maltreated child the environment may be more akin to the amorphous semi-soft Jello released from the confines of its container than to the geometric black box suggested by behaviorist theory.
One moment there are stimuli, eliciting the same response as the day before, in the next moment, the same stimuli is without relationship to the expected response, or new stimuli appear to which the child seeks ineffectively to respond with whatever behaviors are developmentally possible. One time, Mom scoops up the infant child and smothers him in kisses. The next time, in a rage, she scoops him up, screams and shakes him, throws him into a crib. The next time she picks him up his behavior seems erratic. He stiffens and screams as she attempts to give him his bottle.
One moment there is the unlimited, unfettered, unstructured freedom without internal or external boundaries of the neglected child, the next moment the environment is restrictive, the child's responses thwarted from every direction. The toddler, hungry and unsupervised as Dad watches the game, climbs onto counters and eats whatever she finds. Depending on his mood she is laughed at for her behavior, or punished. Later, Dad leaves her, hungry and strapped in her car seat while he runs in the bar for a "quick one" with friends, only to return hours later, gushing with concern over her tearful condition. Subsequent attempts to put her into a car seat result in aggressive behaviors as she tries to avoid a recurrence. She may also begin exhibiting the same aggressive behavior at any attempt to put her in any seat, including her high chair at the table. Later in preschool she may refuse to sit for snacks, lunch, even activities, and exhibit aggressive behaviors towards anyone attempting to modify that behavior.
Classical conditioning involves the learning of involuntary responses and attitudes, after one or more pairings. (Ormrod, 2004). The maltreated child, whether abused or neglected, learns from many "pairings" that initially elicit involuntary responses. Over time, the repetitions and inconsistencies create a complex web of behaviors that at least often appear irrational or bizarre to others, and at most suggest to others a demand that the behaviors be changed. The "records" for these children are never as clear as some would like.
Given this situation what can the aide or teacher attempt when confronted with inappropriate classroom behaviors. Extinction, the disappearance of a Conditioned Response, is one possibility for behavioral change, as in the stiffening and screaming of the abused child when touched by the Conditioned Stimulus, a consistently comforting daycare provider, who is repeatedly presented without the unconditioned stimulus, the mother, is unpredictable and yet is frequently the basis for expecting modifications of behaviors in children at the PreK level. However, even when it occurs. Spontaneous recovery, the recurrence of the Conditioned Response when a period of extinction is followed by rest period, is common.
Higher Order Conditioning, a complex form of learning that depends on a neutral stimulus, paired with an unconditioned stimulus elicits an unconditioned response, is another possibility. For example, the car-seat victim is identified as enjoying story time at preschool. She is provided a new and different "seat," on an oversized cuddly bear strapped to a child's chair on which she only sits at story time. After she reaches a state of responding to the cuddly-bear on a chair with comfort and eager delight at story time, the cuddly-bear chair is brought to the table when her favorite snack is offered.
Extinguishing undesirable responses is an important aspect of learning theories based on classical conditioning. Unfortunately, the speed of accomplishing this is unpredictable, especially when inconsistency in the Conditioned Stimulus and Unconditioned Stimulus pairing is a factor. Another factor that affects extinction involves the tendency to avoid feared stimulus, which minimizes the chance of experiencing Conditioned Stimulus without Unconditioned Stimulus. The maltreated child is subject to have experienced many unidentified and little suspected-as-feared stimuli, which increases their tendency to avoid anything new, frustrates those who attempt to manipulate them into something new. And, as indicated, even with some positive results, spontaneous recovery of the Conditioned Response is also possible.
Counter conditioning by replacing one Conditioned Response with a "more desirable, productive" response is another method. Systematic desensitization is usually more effective than extinction as a means for changing inappropriate responses. The process includes identifying an incompatible response, a stimulus that elicits the incompatible response, and a gradual introduction of the new stimulus to the organism.
For John Watson (1913), who believed "past experience accounts for virtually all behavior," nurture, not nature is the deciding factor in learning.(Ormrod, 2004).
Clark Hull offers a more organismic view that posits certain characteristics are unique to different individuals. These include which rewards are deemed important by an individual, the motivation and incentive concepts included in the learning, intervening variables [habit strength, organism's drive, stimulus intensity, inhibitory factors] that affect "likelihood and strength of a response's occurrence" and "habit-family hierarchy."
One child, consistently beaten with any thing handy to the moment, may exhibit similar behaviors to another who experiences corporal punishment infrequently but is punished with situations deemed to fit the child's "crimes" as in burning a child for playing with matches, feigned abandonment of him for not coming when told, or being closed in a dark closet for playing with light switches. In such situations it matters little whether the learning is identified as occurring through "positive" or "negative" reinforcement… the results, in terms of effect in later learning situations, is negative. The reinforcers, due to the unknown and underlying experiences may differ broadly from child to child, however.
Even though material reinforcers can be tangible objects such as food, trinkets and toys, for the maltreated child those same objects may also be objects of abuse, sources of neglect. Children have been force-fed until they choke into unconsciousness to "teach them to eat" or so they "learn" they "eat like pigs" and need to change eating behaviors. Destruction of favorite toys is used as means for psychological power, trinkets used as bribery to ensure the child's silence or cooperation in sexual abuse activities.
Social reinforcers such as gestures and signs that show positive regard may also have distorted meanings for maltreated children. A pat on the head may be a precursor to hair pulling or lifting a child by the hair to "get his attention." Activity reinforcers are opportunities to engage in a favorite activity, but for the maltreated child may trigger anxieties related to occasions when doing the activity related to one horror or another. Positive feedback informs "which responses are desirable and which are not," but may lack sufficient power to reinforce consistently if the maltreated child's experiences include sarcasm as a precursor to violence or other negative events as in praising a child for sharing a treat with a sibling, only to then be put down by being "reminded" that she is "always so selfish" that she should give the other half of the treat away to make up for it.
Intrinsic reinforcers are internal good feelings. Maltreated children may have few opportunities to experience them, or again may have experienced them in ways that lead to what others consider irrational expectations as is the case for children who frequently or even consistently "learn" that feeling good is only an invitation to abuse or neglect of one type or another to follow in short order and from the least likely direction.
Additionally, whereas timing, magnitude, appeal and consistency generally do influence the effectiveness of reinforcers, for maltreated children these factors, too, are apt to be fraught with unknown, unexpected and uncommon negative connections. One child's father was inclined to wake her and her sister, in the middle of the night, hold a gun to her head while accusing her of some "crime," imaginary or otherwise, and ask "Do you want me to kill you now, or later?" He'd leave the room laughing, then greet them in the morning with a favorite breakfast, pancakes and syrup, as though the nightmare of the night before had never happened.
Unfortunately, whereas Behaviorist learning theories explain much about the undesirable behaviors educators would like to modify or change, behaviorist-based methods aren't very effective with maltreated children.
Cognitivism
It is the challenges of life
Rather than the easy successes
That promote cognitive development.
~Vygotsky via Ormrod~
Rather than the easy successes
That promote cognitive development.
~Vygotsky via Ormrod~
Cognitivism remains the predominant perspective from which learner theories evolve. Perhaps these learning theories offer more effective means for changing behaviors in the classroom. However, because Misty and children her age are the focus of this investigation, cognitivism theories may be less applicable overall than learning theories based on Behaviorism, simply due to their ages. Never the less, the maltreated child is not in stasis. He or she has developed cognitively, albeit research indicates maltreated children experience cognitive delays along with other disabilities, emotional and behaviors problems related to abuse and neglect, and continues to develop and change accordingly.
Social cognitive theory, the learning by observation and modeling, evolved from behaviorism and includes cognitivist ideas. The theory focuses on the how, what and why people learn. Observation of the behavior and consequences of others, in combination with cognition, is involved in learning. A change of behavior does not necessarily result. Reinforcement and punishment indirectly affect learning through awareness, expectation, attention and retention.(Ormrod, 2004)
The cognitive processes related to learning are affected by the expectation of reinforcement and punishment. The extent to which a learned behavior is exhibited is also influenced by the degree of attention paid to the behavior and its consequences.(Ormrod, 2004) Vicarious acquisition of a behavior through observation does not necessitate immediate performance.
A child, therefore, may learn a behavior but not use it until he or she has "a reason for doing so." (Ormrod, 2004) Maltreated children frequently develop high levels of attention to environmental stimuli. Attention, rehearsal and memory codes may be used to develop the information related to the behavior. However, expectations, including efficacy expectations, incentives, and awareness of response-consequence contingencies, increase response only if the child understands which response is related to the reinforcement. These factors are important considerations when determining means and methods for modifying or changing maltreated children's inappropriate behaviors in the school environment.
Live models, symbolic models, and verbal instructions serve as means to learn through modeling. Research on the impact of modeling on learning academic skills, aggression and morality demonstrates its effectiveness. In order to be effective, attention, retention, motor reproduction, and motivation are necessary processes. Assistance in developing memory codes assists in learning from a model. Ormrod mentions that observation of a model had profound effects on children's moral judgments. Children, she said, "Began to make moral decisions similar to those the model had made and opposite to their own previous judgments." [Emphasis mine]. (Ormrod, p. 136).
Modeling "teaches new behaviors," affects "the frequency of previously learned behaviors," may "encourage previously forbidden behaviors," and "increases the frequency of similar behaviors." Effective models must be "competent," have "prestige and power," behave in "stereotypical 'gender-appropriate' ways," and model a behavior "relevant to the observer's situation." (Ormrod, pp. 140-2).
Self-efficacy is the belief that one is capable of "executing" specific behaviors, "particular domains, tasks, or situations," whereas self-concept applies to a "wide variety of activities." According to Ormrod and others, "people's feelings of self-efficacy affect several aspects of their behavior, including their choice of activities, their goals, their effort and persistence, and ultimately their learning and achievement." Prior "successes and failures…messages that others communicate, the successes and failures of others, and thee successes and failures of the group as a whole," affect the development of self-efficacy. (Ormrod, p. 143). The maltreated child brings an odd-mixture of successes and failures, many of which will not be identified by those outside of the environment.
Ormrod also contends that before children develop personal ideas about appropriate and inappropriate behavior," they learn which "behaviors are and are not acceptable to the people around them" by means of "direct and vicarious reinforcement and punishment." In the dysfunctional environment of the maltreated child these "personal ideas" may be appropriate while being considered inappropriate in other situations.
Social cognitive theory implications for classrooms, include student observation of others, descriptions of consequences of behaviors, appropriate and various modeling, increasing students self-efficacy, assisting in setting "realistic expectations for their academic accomplishments," and teaching self-regulation techniques.(Ormrod, pp. 152-153). In order for those observations to occur and to be internalized by the maltreated child, two considerations are important. The first is an awareness that the child will not be an unbiased observer…and others will not likely see as he or she sees, either. The other is that the child not feel threatened while observing or attempting to model new behaviors.
Jean Piaget's interest in the "origins of knowledge" (epistemology) led to clinical studies with children that resulted in his Developmental Theory. Piaget's stage theory is based on the ideas that "structures that change with development," result from constant processes for "interactions that children have with their physical and social environments" in their attempts to "try to make sense of the world around them" as they strive to maintain a state of "equilibrium." Piaget's contention that for learning to occur, "a new experience and prior knowledge must overlap" continues as an important idea in contemporary theories of learning. (Ormrod, pp. 163-168). Where the maltreated child is concerned new experiences might be more effective if there is no overlap with his "prior knowledge."
Lev Vygotsky's "sociocultural perspective" developmental theory contrasts with Piaget's position that "learning is an individual enterprise." For Vygotsky "the adults in a society foster children's learning and development in an intentional and somewhat systematic manner." Society and culture promote "cognitive growth." Through a process called "internalization" children develop "complex mental processes [that] begin as social activities," and "use them independently of the people around them."
Vygotsky saw childhood arguments as a means through which they " discover there are often several points of view about the same situation" and later "internalize the 'arguing' process" by which they then develop the "ability to look at a situation from several different angles on their own." Vygotsky also maintained that "thought and language are distinctly separate functions for infants and young toddlers," before two years of age. Language is first used as a means to communicate and only later becomes a "mechanism of thought," which leads to "self-talk" and "inner speech" by which children "learn to guide and direct their own behaviors through difficult tasks and complex maneuvers in much the same way that adults have previously guided them." According to Ormrod, research supports Vygotsky's view. Again however, for the maltreated child, the possibility that prior learning in the home-culture environment is contrary to the preferred attitudes and behaviors in the classroom is very high. Communication attempted when there is not a shared agreement to meaning of language or its usages isn't apt to be as productive as anticipated or desired. Due to earlier learning experiences, the possibility for misunderstandings is inherent in any communication between the maltreated child and others.
Findings of verbal research include that serial learning is "characterized by a particular pattern," "paired associate learning involves learning pairs of items" and "learning in one situation often affects learning and recall in another situation." (Ormrod) Again the potential for miscommunication and learning gone awry is greater for maltreated children who may have experienced bizarre "patterns," pairs of items associated in ways not even imagined by others, and learning in one situation that simply will not relate to other situations no matter how often the attempt to do so is repeated.
According to theories of individual constructivism and social constructivism the learner is responsible for directing learning. No doubt, people do a great deal with the information they acquire, actively trying to organize and make sense of it, often in unique, idiosyncratic ways. For Vygotsky learning and thinking are influenced by the physical and social contexts in which people are immersed" (Ormrod, pp. 180-181). Maltreated children may be doing a great deal of this type of learning in an attempt to "make sense" of information from the outside world. As Ormrod points out "as children grow, they become capable of increasingly more sophisticated thought." (Ormrod, p. 182)
But what conclusions will maltreated children reach given their prior knowledge when it is suddenly "immersed" in a new culture, with differences in language meanings and applications, modeling that doesn't bear any relationship to that which they have experienced and learned from?
Memory and Motivation
As Misty stands frozen in time awaiting the action from the aide that will determine whether she lives or dies, her mind may be flooded with memories of other similar situations… similar at least from her perspective. Whatever the aide does, Misty's response will be predetermined by her learning through early stimulus-response experiences, those "relatively permanent changes in mental representations or associations," modified to some degree by her cognitive processing of those experiences. Her memories, stored, retained and recalled, will relate to the learning process as it is manifested. Her motivation towards action, the "state" rather than a process that arouses her to action, pushes her in a particular direction, and keeps her engaged may well determine the environment she will help to create and experience both for the foreseeable future and beyond.(Ormrod).
One might liken learning and memory to the relieving scratching in response to an intolerable itch. The itch is motivation. The degree of motivation determines the intention and attention of the child towards the experience or information available. The educationally at-risk child is frequently considered learning delayed, and difficult to motivate. Perhaps the child simply has an itch so intense that intention and attention cannot be brought to bear on other things? For Misty the primary motivation of the moment may be intense…an extension of the need for survival. Given the most opportune stimulus, her response might lead to learning and remembering entirely new information upon which she will begin to build.
Ormrod devotes a great deal of intention and attention to the dynamics of memory in relation to learning. She makes several generalizations in relation to educational practices. First, because attention is considered essential for learning, she suggests variety in topics and presentation styles, frequent breaks, asking questions, the minimization of distractions when independent work is assigned, seating of "students near the teacher if they have difficulty paying attention," and the monitoring of student's behaviors. Additionally she suggests that differences in attention to various stimuli, information processing ability, selectivity of memory and the limited capacity of working memory be considered.
These factors may all be appropriate for some students, some times. However, in the case of maltreated children there is a strong potential for a disconnect between what Ormrod proposes and the results expected. Consider the attention factor. If a maltreated child is hungry and wondering if there will be food at home or how he will get something to eat, there is little else that will hold his or her attention for very long. For Misty, the question of whether her behavior will result in the loss of a much-needed snack could be an important factor.
Similarly, if the child is sitting on belt welts across his bottom, sleep deprived because of frequent violence in the home at all hours of the day or night, afraid about the safety of his mother, worried about what is happening to his little sister, obsessing over whether others can smell the accident in his pants that he was made to wear to school to teach him a lesson, Ormrod's suggestions to increase attention or decrease distractions are not likely to have much impact.
In fact, those efforts may be counter-productive. Will a child concerned about his mother's safety attend to variety in topics and presentations or will the multiplicity of distractions increase his or her anxiety levels? Do frequent breaks benefit the child teased and bullied by classmates because clothing is "inappropriate," social skills are sub-par, personal hygiene is inadequate, his mother shows up at school, intoxicated and belligerent, his father is in jail, or of any of the other possible aspects of maltreated children's lives? Will a child frequently slapped across her face focus more when seated within striking distance of a teacher? Will the child confronted with an enraged parent screaming questions as a routine behavior prior to beating respond positively to questioning? What happens to a child's ability to pay attention to school work while her behavior is "monitored" if that child lives in an environment where someone watching means someone looking for an excuse to relieve his anger by kicking the dog or pummeling the child?
Obviously these examples serve as a basis for understanding that different people really do attend to the same stimulus for different reasons. Misty's attention is on the aide. This is an observable behavior. Beyond that little is known to the outsider. The above examples also provide an explanation for a maltreated child's inability to "process only a limited amount of information at a time." Misty's mind may be so intently focused on the risk of losing out on food that she is unable to attend to whether her behavior is appropriate or not, to be concerned if someone might have been injured by her behavior, or whether her attribution of blame to the other child is accurate. Ormrod points out that long-term memory "provides a knowledge base from which to interpret new information." For the four or five year old maltreated child that knowledge base is apt to be inappropriate or even inaccessible in terms of entering an academic situation. Humpty-Dumpty said, "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less." (Lewis Carol in Alice's Adventures in Wonderland). For maltreated children, among others with similar discontinuities between themselves and the school culture, that line is often more akin to fact than fiction. The knowledge base they bring to school often includes so many distortions of language, meaning, and experience, that any new information encountered in school will likewise be subject to the same distortions. (Slaughter-Defoe & Brown, 1998). Misty may be in the habit of "throwing temper tantrums at home" with no negative consequences, may be laughed at, or may be ignored as though she is invisible to those around her. She may be modeling a parent's behavior when he or she is angry and think it appropriate.
Teachers may not realize the unique interpretations of maltreated children to whatever they have experienced, and however they processes it are a part of the child's knowledge base, against which all in class behaviors will be considered. The concept of Tabula Rasa at birth is debated. At five, there is no chance of a Tabula Rasa. The slate is written upon.
The process of construction, where a child uses "bits and pieces" of information in an attempt to "build a reasonable understanding of the world" takes on even greater meaning when as for the maltreated child, the world experienced is so far removed from "reasonable." Understanding it may result in ever more unreasonable interpretations based on the perceptions of sensation that for others lacking similar experiences may fit neatly into a schema resembling more closely the usual definitions of "reasonable." To adulterate a common cliché': One child's meaningful learning may be another's nonsense rhyme, or another's keystone to all that follows.
Sadly, maltreated children do not only have distorted learning, they frequently have been deprived of experiences like "pretend play" that facilitate other children learning to "develop story-telling and memory abilities that contribute to emergent literacy (Pelerine & Galda, 1993). They often are denied life-experiences that also limit the development of a meaningful information base. Research indicates that children from low-income families seldom have experiences such as going to museums, trips, even shopping experiences that offer exposure to variety and the chance to develop an understanding of differences on any level. These deprivations affect cognitive and social development.
Maltreated children from any economic level may be equally as deficient in experiences deemed positive from developmental perspectives, even more-so in some cases where children under five are not only abused and neglected, but also deprived of any peer or other relationships. When low-income deficiencies in experiences combine with dysfunctional family experiences the child has even fewer chances to develop cognitively and socially.
Today some theories of human development conceptualize it in terms of systems of social activity and cultural meaning (Serpell, 1993, 1999). For them development can be understood as "adaptations" (Super and Harkness (1986, 1997) to "cultural models" (Holland & Quinn, 1987 in ) or "ethnotheories" (Harkness & Super, 1992) based on structures of "physical and social settings," in which patterns of child care customs and socialization, and beliefs about timing (Goodnow & Collins, 1990)"parental goals…and preferred strategies of intervention to cultivate the child's appropriation of various valued, cultural practices," (Serpell et al, 1997) " result in "developmental
niche's" within which each child develops. Each niche leads to a "developmental process of participatory appropriation (Rogoff, 1993). (Serpell et al., 2002), that serves as a "filter between larger cultural formations and the developing child" Lomnitz-Adler (1992) and Levinson (1996), and is referred to "as an intimate culture." (Serpell, 1997, 2001). This culture must be addressed and researched in terms of child development in much the same ways that other group cultures are. Research has established that belief systems, rituals, and other culturally driven behaviors such as parenting styles affect the child's adaptation to a school culture that is measurably different from that in which they have developed.
Today, it is generally assumed that students can be motivated in multiple ways and therefore should not be labeled as 'motivated' or 'not motivated.' The important issue, according to Ormrod, is "understanding how and why students are motivated for school achievement." For this reason, assessments that do not generate "a more multifaceted understanding of student motivation" can be misleading. Motivation is no longer assumed to be a stable trait, but is "more situated, contextual, and domain specific," that involves factors such as self-efficacy, attributions, intrinsic motivation, and goals. (Ormrod, 2004) If those factors are considered only in the abstract rather than from the perspective of how they may have developed in a child's home culture any attempt to motivate is likely to fail for reasons not understood, and therefore be not correctable within the school-culture learning environment.
During development, during those periods when a child is learning and beginning the complex transition from more stimulus response type learning to cognitive knowing about knowing responses, the home environment "colors" the way every thing is perceived by the child. Whereas another child begins life learning that discomforts can be alleviated through the mediation of another as in Mother bringing a bottle, Father changing a diaper, siblings offering entertainments that help change "moods," the maltreated child seeking similar results may instead experience continued hunger, physical pain, isolation. What is learned will be different.
For Tolman, one role of motivation involves the ways it "affects which features of the environment are paid attention to and therefore what is learned." (Daniels) What the child has learned about responses to his or her behaviors, the expectancies of nurturing ones…or not…or the more difficult to comprehend inconsistencies more common among the maltreated young affect the ways each child focuses on various aspects of the environment. The maltreated child who experiences frequent hunger may be listening intently for delivery of morning snack than the details of a story that holds the rest of the children enthralled. If the child experiences frequent physical abuse, attention may be on the moods of those around him, a distant footfall in the hall. The child who has known more psychological abuse than not, may be intent on protecting herself from more in the school environment.
There is growing evidence that "extrinsic incentives and pressures can undermine motivation to perform even inherently interesting activities," (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002)Deci & Ryan Self-determination theory integrates "two perspectives on human motivation." The belief that "humans are motivated to maintain an optimal level of stimulation (Hebb 1955)," and the other perspective that "humans have basic needs for competence (White 1959) and personal causation or self-determination (deCharms 1968)," may be effective means for determining more effective means for motivating maltreated children.
Before "optimal stimulation and challenging activities" can be identified for them, however, their early environments must be acknowledged and examined in light of what is known about learning and motivation. "Competence" must be redefined from within their experiences. And maltreated children need to be accepted as "competent and self determined" in those ways in which they are. Doing that will enable those working with them to minimize external control and negative competence feedback that is known to reduce intrinsic motivation. (Cameron & Pierce 1994; Deci & Ryan 1985; Deci et al. 1999; in(Eccles & Wigfield, 2002)
Interested people can determine what activities provide an opportunity for a child to be intrinsically motivated through careful, open-minded observational assessments of what the child does by choice. A child who appears to be non-interested in peer play, choosing instead to remain intent on watching may have highly developed people-observation skills. Another may have developed listening skills beyond the norm… but not for listening to stories that have no meaning to him. The child unable to manipulate pencil and scissors may be able to peel a potato with a knife most children aren't even allowed to use.
"Interest" as individual or situational is being studied more recently. (e.g., Alexander et al. 1994, Hidi & Harackiewicz 2001, Schiefele 1999). Whether a child responds to an activity with feelings of "involvement, stimulation, or flow," or because the activity has "personal significance or importance" (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002) is especially important to evaluate in open-minded ways with maltreated children. A hungry child will become very interested in learning to use scissors if she understands doing so will make access to food products easier. Learning to manipulate a can opener will hold attention when being asked to develop or demonstrate that the child can coordinate the turning of paper while simultaneously manipulating scissors to cut out a teddy bear.
Motivation among preschoolers is an important issue because of the immediate link to achievement and the likely cumulative effect that mastery motivation may have on learning and achievement across time. The alternative is that children with "low mastery motivation make smaller academic gains in preschool," and then "face school with a combined situation of lower achievement and lower mastery motivation."(Turner & Johnson, 2003)
Research does show the neglected child often has a greater chance and likelihood of discovering and developing "environmental control," of having an "action orientation," and exercising "volitional strategies," in order to motivate his own behavior. Unfortuantely, the abused child is more like the "state-oriented" individual.
According to Locus of control theories, one should expect to succeed to the extent that one feels in control of one's successes and failures. (Crandall et al. 1965; Findley & Cooper 1983; Rotter 1966; Weisz 1984 ). The maltreated child often does not know the causes of his successes and failures, and seldom feels in control of them when he does. His experiences might include being blamed for things over which he had no control, having any successes ignored or denigrated. He may lack the pre-learning of positive reinforcement or constructive feed back. Locus of control theorists call this "unknown control" and suggest that this not knowing can undermine his motivation to apply himself to other tasks. (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002)
Tolman/s view has been characterized as a "what leads to what" theory, a theory of signs, guideposts, and behavior roots. The theory is that with repeated experiences, the probability is learned that the given behavior will lead to the expected end result.
Generally a child before the age of five will not know herself as a "self" (Campbell & Bickhard, 1986, p. 118). Around that age a child begins to understand the self. However, whereas the "knowing" may be expressed as beliefs, it is more often demonstrated as "metastrategies for managing the child's being in diverse kinds of life situations," (Campbell & Bickhard, 1986, p. 118)
The maltreated child's goals and strategies have developed within an environment unlike that of the school-culture. He may appear "shy" or otherwise disinclined to become involved when in fact he is attempting to find equilibrium by relating what he "knows" to the unknown situation. Maltreated children have fewer opportunities to develop social skills at the peer level. For reasons of secrecy, maltreated children are frequently kept as virtual prisoners within the house. Again, time for the child to observe without feeling threatened can prove beneficial.
Attribution theory is also helpful when working with maltreated children. Attribution theorists emphasize that individuals' interpretations of their achievement outcomes, rather than motivational dispositions or actual outcomes, determine subsequent achievement strivings. Beliefs can be changed through teacher's reactions, feedback and environmental manipulations. (Graham, 1984; Licht, 1983; Pintrich & Schunk, 2002; in Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002). Study skills, and engagement can be increased by relating activities to children's interests. (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002) However, the key to understanding maltreated children's interests is in identifying through sustained, objective observation what each child's interests may be within the school environment, and not jumping to conclusions, or judging the interest based on what is "known" about children's' interests in general.
Maltreated children's experiences are far removed from those of the average child. Their interests frequently reflect those differences. The neglected child with free reign in the kitchen at home is likely to exhibit little if any interest in a play kitchen or pretend food, but be totally absorbed in participating in snack preparation. If others with less interest distract or interfere with his focus during the snack activity, his inappropriate, even aggressive, response may appear irrational. The reaction can be an added indication of the degree of interest. In this child's context, nothing could be more rational or motivating than his interpretation that learning skills and knowledge related to food preparation improves his eating opportunities, or the feeding of younger siblings.
The maltreated child, particularly the one considered "amiable," with her eyes solidly locked on the teacher as an activity is explained, may be assessed as a "good listener" but the child is not listening as much to words as tone, not intent on learning as watching for eye change that serves as a warning to escape in a hurry.
Ultimately, students should not be labeled "motivated" or "unmotivated." Instead, teachers should consider alternative learning environments that enhance all student's motivation.
Since "context shapes students' motivation, engagement, strategy use, and achievement," changes to the environment make more sense than "citing lack of motivation for a particular student as a reason for lower than expected academic performance." (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002)
Conclusion
Historically, research has been focused on identifying the specific risk factors that predict children's deficiencies and dysfunction (Fantuzzo & Mohr, 2000). However, there is an urgent need for research that identifies relationships among emergent competencies and school adjustment for vulnerable populations of children, including maltreated children. (Luthar, Cicchetti, & Bronwyn, 2000). This research agenda is twofold: first, to distinguish age-appropriate competencies and significant contexts and second, to build capacities across contexts to foster these competencies (Cicchetti & Lynch, 1993). (Fantuzzo & McWayne, 2002)
Today, psychologists are more inclined to look at behavior in larger contexts and over longer time. Complex environments rather than specific stimuli, choices made by organisms, and persistence in spite of change in environment are among the new directions of study. These directions offer positive alternatives to consider in terms of behaviorism as it relates to maltreated children.
Extinction is not the "most dependable method" of eliminating unwanted behavior for similar reasons to those previously mentioned. With maltreated children, because of the complex web of unusual stimulus response learnings, the specific consequence that is reinforcing is not always identifiable, nor is it always one, or even the same one. Presenting desired consequences noncontingently, reinforcing other behaviors and reinforcing incompatible behaviors can offer greater chances for "success" in eliciting behavior change from maltreated children.
When reinforcement doesn't work, several factors need to be considered. One is whether the reinforcer is reinforcing. Consistency is another. Attempting shaping too quickly is another.
Research indicates that students with a "history of academic failure, poorly motivated students, anxious students, and students for whom nothing else works," may benefit from classroom reinforcements. Children identified with "developmental delay" or "learning disability" or those with "chronic behavior problems also benefit. Presumably, children at-risk due to maltreatment can, too.
Adults convey to children the ways in which their culture
interprets and responds to the world. In their interactions with children, adults share the meanings they attach to objects, events, and more generally human experience. In the process they transform, or mediate, the situations that children encounter. These meanings are then conveyed through a variety of mechanisms, including language, symbols, mathematics, art, music, literature, and so on. (Ormrod, p. 170) Unfortunately for Misty and other maltreated children these meanings are frequently bi-polar as well as disparate and disconnected. The meanings conveyed aren't necessarily the meanings received.
Until we know more about maltreated children's early stimulus-response experiences, early cognitive directions, memory and motivation developments, assessments are necessarily skewed, plans and goals not particularly appropriate, applications of learning theories to modify and change school-culture behaviors, we need to tread carefully where even the angels may fear to go.
Research is needed to look at new ways of guiding Misty and her peers away from an automatic academic at-risk determination to one of motivated and excited lifelong learner status beginning at as early an age as possible. One possibility may be to stop all but the most important attempts at behavior modification until a child has been given an alternative set of learning experiences upon which to build. As some might say… we need to choose our battles more wisely.
Head Start accomplished a lot with their goal of preparing children to learn, rather than focusing on meeting artificial academic standards as is now required of them. Perhaps that needs to be revisited along with reexamining the concepts of when a child is ready to learn academically and through what methods.
If "nothing works" with these children as so many teachers lament, in article after article, then perhaps the answer lies right there. Do nothing…or do nothing more than protecting her and others from her inappropriate and aggressive in-school behaviors. If a child is unable to process new information because maltreatment has created a flawed foundation, build another one. Prepare the child for a time when he or she can compare both perspectives from the inside out, and make a choice for positive outcomes.
Provide an environment in which she feels safe and can focus on learning rather than survival. Telling her school is a safe place is not enough. She needs the opportunity to learn that for herself. Use those learning theories most likely to lead to new learning at first. Set simple achievable goals at which the child can succeed, provide the opportunity and allow the necessary time for that child to do so, and in the process help the child build a new foundation, a new set of learning behaviors that are effective in the school-culture. Once that stage occurs, a child's natural curiosity and desire to learn will surface again.
For now, a good first step in dealing with these harmed and vulnerable children may be borrowed from the medical community. First, do no harm.
References
Dake, J. A., Price, J. H., & Murnan, J. (2003). Evaluation of a child abuse prevention curriculum for third-grade students: Assessment of knowledge and efficacy expectations. The Journal of School Health, 73(2), 76-.
Daniels, D.EDWARD CHACE TOLMAN-THE THINKING MAN'S RAT, or-GETTING TO KNOW YOU,SAYS THE RAT TO THE SITUATION: AN INTRODUCTION TO "PURPOSIVE BEHAVIORISM". Retrieved January 28, 2004, from http://www.sonoma.edu/users/d/daniels/tolman_lecture.htm
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-133.
Fantuzzo, J., & McWayne, C. (2002). The relationship between peer-play interactions in the family context and dimensions of school readiness for low-income preschool children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 79-87.
Gullatt, D. E., & Stockton, C. E. (2000). Recognizing and reporting suspected child abuse. American Secondary Education, 29(1), 19-.
Howse, R. B., Lange, G., Farran, D. C., & Boyles, C. D. (2003). Motivation and self-regulation as predictors of achievement in economically disadvantaged young children. The Journal of Experimental Education, 71(2), 151-.
Hurst, M. D. (2004). Lifelong battle. Education Week
American Education's Newspaper of Record, 23(22), 22-25.
Kesner, J. E., & Robinson, M. (2002). Teachers and mandated reporters of child maltreatment: Comparison with legal, medical, and social services reporters. Children & Schools, 24(4), 222-.
Kistner, J. A., Ziegert, D. I., Castro, R., & Robertson, B. (2001). Helplessness in early childhood: Prediction of symptoms associated with depression and negative self-worth. Merrill - Palmer Quarterly, 47(3), 336-355.
Leroy, C., & Symes, B. (2001). Teachers perspectives on the family backgrounds of children at-risk. McGill Journal of Education, 36(1), 45-.
Levendosky, A. A., Huth-Bocks, A. C., Shapiro, D. L., & Semel, M. A. (2003). The impact of domestic violence on the maternal-child relationship and preschool-age children's functioning. Journal of Family Psychology, 17(3), 275-287.
Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 313-328.
Maisel, E. (2002). The Van Gogh blues: The creative person's path through depression.: Rodale.
Nemeroff, C. B. (1998). The neurobiology of depression. Scientific American, 278(6), 42-49.
Odom, S. L., & Wolery, M. (2003). A unified theory of practice in early intervention/Early childhood Special Education: Evidence-based practices. Journal of Special Education, 37(3), 164-174.
Ormrod, J. E. (2004). Human Learning (4 ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Ryan, A. M., Gheen, M. H., & Midgley, C. (1998). Why do some students avoid asking for help?: An examination of the interplay among students' academic efficacy, teachers' social-emotional role, and the classroom goal structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 528-535.
Sechrist, W. (2000). Health educators and child maltreatment: A curious silence. The Journal of School Health, 70(6), 241-243.
Serpell, R., Sonnenschein, S., Baker, L., & Ganapathy, H. (2002). Intimate culture of families in the early socialization of literacy. Journal of Family Psychology, 16(4), 391-405.
Shumba, A. (2002). Teacher conceptualization of child abuse in schools in the new millenium. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 17(4), 403-415.
Turner, L. A., & Johnson, B. (2003). A Model of mastery motivation for at-risk preschoolers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(3), 495-505.
U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, A. o. C., Youth and Families. (2003). Child Maltreatment 2001. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
.jpg)
1 comment:
Me again. :)
Would you mind if I shared this post with my son's teachers? One of my current battles is trying to get them to understand that his behavior (he's Autistic) is mostly him reacting to his environment. They don't seem to realize that the way they are treating him is affecting him in different areas of his life, among other toxic things.
Post a Comment