11 Behaviourism in Education

Chapter Citation

Duffy, J., Jhanjee, K., Henschel, M. & Choi, S. (2025) Behaviourism in education In Psychological Roots. BCcampus Press. Retrieved from https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/psychologicalroots/chapter/behaviourism-in-education/

Introduction

In this chapter our team, consisting of Kunal, Jaryn, Mika, SunWoo, and myself (James), will be delving into the relationship between Behaviourism and education and training systems along with how and why that relationship may be too harshly emphasised, this being the niche we will be filling in this book. After I, James, bring you a brief overview of Behaviourist history and main thought, along with some popular examples of the relationship, my partners will speak to you about how Behaviourism affected and developed the education system specifically in South Korea as personally seen and researched by Sunwoo, Kunal will give look into how behaviourism filled the military training of himself and others, how it explains the concept and behaviour known as Learned Helplessness with Mika, and finally Jaryn will go over some of its limitations and failings. Behaviourism has been infused in education systems worldwide, and even with the advent of Cognitive Theory slowly taking its precedence, its wake is still easily felt today in testing culture and military training.

Brief overview:

Behaviourism is a very old and well-trod line of thinking in Psychology, and its tenets are relatively simple: rely only on what you can externally observe and measure from the subject’s behaviour, all behaviour is either a reflex (made by genetics) brought by specific stimuli or based on past compounding-reinforcement of reflexes, and a focus on environmental conditions (Graham, 2023). While various figures in Behaviourism take these tenets to different levels, and even interpret them differently, all branches largely follow them. Behaviourist research, logically, was focused on Cause and Effect in behaviour (derived from research such as Edward Thorndike’s law of effect), what stimulus will illicit what response, how can that be modified by reinforcement and punishment (This is the underlying theory of how the aforementioned compounding-reinforcement would work), and how the response might be tacked on to another stimulus. Important figures include Burrhus F. Skinner, Ivan Pavlov, John B. Watson, Francis Galton, Jacob R. Kantor, and Arthur W. Staats (Graham, 2023). Among others, these were the pioneers and inheritors of Behaviourism, although we will not be speaking of any particular figures here. And now that we’re all on the same page, let us get into the meat of our paper, starting with Sunwoo’s research.

Behaviourism and the Korean Education System

Korea introduced strict behaviourist methods to rebuild its education system and grow the economy, which was destroyed after the Korean War 75 years ago. Afterwards, Korean education evolved a constructivist approach with the development of IT technology to include more creativity and student participation. Accordingly, the paradigm shift process of Korean education is as follows. First, for the last decades, Korean education has been influenced by the tradition of behaviourism and is even structured around it (Kim., 2004). As an example of the first behaviourist approach to education, Korean education has evolved closely with behaviourist educational views since the Korean War in 1950. After the Korean War, between 1950 and 1960, Korea’s education system was destroyed. According to Lee and colleagues, the three-year war forced Korea to rebuild a nation from the ashes of war, and these expressions highlight the ruins of war. They argue that education played an important role in achieving Korea’s economic development and democracy during this period (2012), so education focused on practical skills for economic growth and rebuilding the country. “The primary concern in behaviourism is the ability of humans and animals to learn” (Tomic, 1993, p.40). Korean teachers used conditioning by offering punishments to improve student’s learning abilities and control them. Then, during the 1961-1979 period of the Park Chung-hee administration, a dictator but father of Korea’s modernization and economic growth, education became a tool for industrialization. With the advent of the economic development plans in the 1960s, technicians supporting exports became more critical, emphasizing vocational high school education and vocational training (Lee et al., 2012). Educational goals were directly related to national economic development. Behaviourism emerged as the theory of development education, which states that education should be a means of national development and economic development under the Park Chung-hee administration (Ko Jae-hee, 2016, as cited by Lee, 2020). For example, schools trained students on a workforce basis, emphasizing memorization and strict rules. The theory of developmental education during this period, which emphasized behavioural change and learning outcomes through education, was dominated by the theory of behavioural education.

Behaviorism in education became stronger between 1980 and 1988 under President Chun Doo-hwan, a military dictator. After President Park Chung-hee’s assassination in 1979, the Gwangju Democratization Movement on May 18, 1980, was sparked by students and young people’s resistance against Chun Doo-hwan’s military coup and the declaration of the May 17 emergency martial law, which later became a central driving force for the democratization movement in the 1980s. The Chun Doo-hwan administration coordinated the conflicting demands of students, parents, and teachers, making education policy the center of political conflict (Sorensen, 2023). The government used education to control people. For instance, punishment was common, and students had to obey their teachers completely.

Educational reforms began after the democratization of 1990–2000, and Korea experienced changes. In the early 1990s, the Kim Young-sam administration severed the continuity of military rule and restored the civilian government (Sorensen, 2023). Behaviourism in education weakened, and constructivism in education grew. Schools tried to encourage creativity and student-centred learning. For example, the new government changed educational policies to increase flexibility in classrooms and reduce students’ violent discipline. However, supervisors’ control in education even strengthened the top-bottom authority, such as writing daily attendance books and reviewing teachers’ lesson plans (Sorensen, 2023).
Finally, since the 2000s, Korean education has tried to break away from behaviourism. It has seen a surge in practice-oriented research with the development of IT technology and the rise of constructivist approaches inherent in online learning environments. For example, there has been increased interest in applying constructivism in IT-based learning environments such as web-based, distance, online, and e-learning (Kang et al., 2007). However, many students still focus on memorization and test scores because college entrance exams are still competitive.

In conclusion, education in Korea was rooted in behaviourism from the 1950s to the 1980s, which can be seen as an inevitable choice for national reconstruction and industrialization. However, since the 1990s, the emergence of the era of democratization and information has become a turning point in the education paradigm and has emerged constructivism. “Behaviourism attempts to describe, explain, and influence behaviour” (Bakker, 1987, as cited in Tomic, 1993). Building on this, according to Tomic (1993), behaviourist researchers assumed that even though their set of principles and patterns was limited, it could still account for most human behaviour. In other words, they attempted to explain how learning processes happen using one unified conditioning theory. On the other hand, from a constructivist point of view, learning is not a stimulus-response phenomenon, and it requires self-regulation and conceptual structure building through reflection and abstraction. In other words, the problem is not to find and solve memorized answers but to induce students to experience the pleasure inherent in solving problems of their own choice, thereby developing an effective motivation to continue learning. If the teacher is a knowledge transferor in behaviourism, the role of the teacher in constructivism would be a coach or facilitator of student understanding (Hwang, 1998). Although the educational reform called open education based on constructivism has been spreading throughout the country since the late 1990s (Hwang, 1998), and physical punishment has been prohibited in today’s Korean educational environment, the behaviourist approach still influences invisible rewards and evaluations through memorization and testing, mainly a competitive university entrance examination.

Behaviour Change Through Basic Military Training

BMOQ (Basic military officer qualification) is undertaken by potential OCdt’s (Officer cadets) who plan on becoming members of the CAF (Canadian Armed Forces). This is a mandatory 12 weeklong training that must be successfully completed in order to further their careers in the military. There is an exclusive establishment, CFLRS (Canadian Forces Leadership and Recruit School) at Saint Jean in Quebec, where this training is undertaken and where the OCdt’s reside for the duration of the course. The goal of recruiting and basic military training in the CAF is to sustain operational effectiveness by attracting and enrolling enough candidates to meet personnel demands. These programs ensure individuals are morally, mentally, and physically prepared for military life and equipped with the skills, knowledge, and attitudes needed for further occupational training. Operating since the CAF’s inception, they address the needs of officers and enlisted members across the Royal Canadian Navy, Royal Canadian Air Force, Canadian Army, and Military Personnel Command, covering over 100 occupations. Military initial training, whether for recruits or officer cadets, aims to dismantle prior behaviours and reshape individuals. Civilians are resocialized in a relatively isolated environment to adapt to military norms, which prioritize dominance, toughness, risk-taking, and an acceptance of violence (Bonner et al., 2022). Daily activities are performed in close proximity to others, with uniform treatment and shared tasks for all individuals. These activities follow a strict schedule dictated by institutional authorities. The training process involves rigorous instruction combined with frequent use of rewards and punishments, sometimes given without clear justification, to shape behaviour and ensure conformity to the system’s framework (Bonner et al., 2022). This conditioning is crucial for military operations in combat, as it prepares individuals to perform tasks under extreme stress that are not typically required in civilian life. The aim of this training is to dismantle the civilian mindset and replace it with a military-oriented way of thinking. I successfully finished my BMOQ in the summer of 2023. As such, I can offer a firsthand perspective of how the training unfolds over 3 months. The first month is called the ‘indoc’ period. Cadets aren’t allowed to leave CFLRS at all. Everything is very regimented. There are strict protocols like always marching within the confines of the building, which is a rather big, self-sustaining complex. There are mandatory lights out and wake up times which need to be followed. An OCdt from within the platoon (ranging from 30 to 50 cadets), based on alphabetical order, is made in charge of the platoon for each day. They are responsible for the platoon to adhere to the scheduled activities for that day. This is the first step where a leadership role is injected into the OCdt in charge. Following the chain of command is one of the most important aspects in military life. This compels the OCdt to change their behaviour to act a leader who’s commands will be followed by the rest of the platoon. Timelines are deliberately kept very tight, for instance, wake up time is at 0500 hours and reporting to the mess for breakfast at 0520. Waking up earlier than 0500 hrs is also not allowed (lights cannot be switched on before then).

A reward and punishment system is primarily used to shape the behaviour of the candidates. Every cadet is given a swipe card. In the event a rule is broken or protocol not followed, a ‘bad’ swipe is given. Conversely, in the event of performing a task well (like acing rifle shooting at the range), a ‘good’ swipe is given. If an OCdt accumulates 8 ‘bad’ swipes, they are automatically withdrawn from the training and have to retry it again the following summer. So, the stakes are high in that regard as no would want to go through this ordeal twice. In the event that the platoon does not make it on time for a tasking, the OCdt in charge is given a bad swipe and not the whole platoon. Similarly, if any member does not follow protocol, not only that member, but the whole platoon has to face the consequences which can take form in skipped meals or burpees and other type of physical inconveniences. This strategy involves punishing the entire group for the mistake of one member. This approach can lead to the individual losing the group’s trust, prompting group members to apply their own forms of discipline to encourage the individual to comply and improve their performance (Bonner et al., 2022). So, from a behavioural point of view, every cadet has a burden on themselves to act in accordance with the interest of the group. Conditioning is at the forefront of military training. Identity formation is shaped through conditioning, social learning, training, adaptation and a willingness to align with group norms and rituals. This process often prioritizes collective interests while suppressing individual traits. These insights align with social identity theory, highlighting the critical role of the group and social context in defining one’s sense of self (Heward et al., 2024). In the following months after the ‘indoc’ period, field trainings and other more salient features of military training, like firearm safe handling, gas mask training, rappelling and proper use of equipment are undertaken. This involves staying in the outdoors over weeks. Looking back, this conditioning seems methodological. In the ‘indoc’ phase, cadets are scrutinized and punished for things like not having uniforms properly buttoned or not having combat trousers or boot laces properly bloused. These might seem trivial, but in the heat of action, loosing one’s compass or map due to an unbuttoned pocket or having a snake crawl up one’s un bloused trousers can be problematic to say the least. The conditioning done through punishment sets up the cadet to be equally, if not more responsible for things like safe rifle handling, it’s maintenance and quick reaction time for putting on a gas mask in times of actual emergencies on a battlefield.

Experiential learning in military training focuses on collaborative exercises that build teamwork, communication, and cohesion. These activities help develop leadership skills as recruits lead tasks or teams, reflecting military hierarchies. Exposure to high-pressure scenarios sharpens decision-making, adaptability, and quick thinking – key skills for combat readiness (Kudrat, 2023). During the last phase of the training, the whole platoon is sent to a base in Farnham, Quebec. This base exists solely to act as a war simulator. Proper battlefield procedures are to be followed. There are ex service men and women who are paid actors to act as insurgents. Various scenarios are established and every OCdt is to lead their section (involving 7-10 individuals) for a given mission. These missions run 24/7 in 4-hour blocks. This is the final test where all the learnt skills and knowledge are put to the test. No one is able to sleep for the duration of these missions, which take around 3-4 days to complete. Everyone maybe gets 20 minutes of snooze time per 4 hours during those days. The leader of the section does not get any rest at all for the 4-hour mission. It involves a lot of cognitive input despite being exposed to the elements, discomfort due to the lack of showering, nutrition and most importantly, sleep.

Going through this training process creates cohesion and commitment amongst the cadets. The group effects over the duration of this training shapes the cadets view and behaviour to match the CAF’s Ethos, a doctrine which serves to guide professional judgment and enhance performance standards. It clearly outlines acceptable and unacceptable behaviours, which the cadets by undergoing various forms of classical and operant conditioning throughout the training are moulded to fit within the realm of these Ethos. Although punishment is not considered the most effective strategy in modern Psychology, the various possibilities of being punished in different ways seems to be useful in shaping the recruits. It might also be particularly effective in military context, since punishments are handed out for the same reasons, and no one is immune to them. This also helps contribute towards fairness, which is an important factor for team building and cohesion. Being punished for not making the timing for breakfast during recruit training can transform into a timing being met on the battlefield down the line. At the end of successfully completing this training, apart from the sense of accomplishment, the behavioral changes developed often persist after recruits complete their training, though the extent and longevity can vary depending on individual factors and circumstances.

Learned Helplessness & It’s Link to Academic Performance

Learned helplessness was first coined by Martin Seligman in the late 1960s, and it refers to a psychological state where people believe they lack control over their situation or circumstances (Seligman, 1972). This concept has originated from Seligman’s famous experiment in which he exposed dogs to either escapable, or inescapable shocks. The dogs who were subjected to inescapable shocks did not try to act or take initiative when they were given a chance to escape (Seligman & Maier, 1967). Thus, creating the idea of learned helplessness. A key aspect of learned helplessness is that after repeated experiences where individuals lack control, they start to expect that future events will not lead to positive outcomes. The consequences of learned helplessness have been studied in humans, but more specifically, it has been studied regarding its effects on mental health and academic performance. In the realm of academia, learned helplessness can be observed when students feel a lack of control over their educational outcomes after repeated failure, which often results in decreased motivation and diminished performance. For example, a student who fails multiple exams might start to believe that their failures are predictive of future outcomes, so they lose their belief in themselves, and suffer a loss of motivation to try to do better.

Research indicates that test anxiety serves as a predictor of learned helplessness among high school students (Abak, 2023). This study also indicated that students with higher levels of test anxiety experienced more learned helplessness than students with lower levels comparatively (Abak, 2023). Students who displayed greater academic resilience showed less susceptibility to learned helplessness. It is important to prevent or lessen the impact of learned helplessness within educational settings. Some studies have shown that a focus on interventions which reduce learned helplessness and develop academic resilience among students have been beneficial (Wadi et al., 2024). Learned helplessness, and how it plays into test anxiety can create a cycle that is hard to break and can lead to negative academic outcomes. As mentioned above, a student who faces failure repeatedly may begin to internalize these failures and see them as something that is fixed and not changeable or adaptable. This in turn leads to decreased motivation and engagement. Due to this, the student may do poorly in tests or projects, and that reinforces their sense of helplessness, and would create more anxiety and passivity. This cycle highlights the need for interventions that may help to mitigate both learned helplessness and test anxiety, and academic anxiety in general. To mitigate the impact of learned helplessness and test anxiety, various resilience-building interventions have been introduced in educational environments. One effective method is the Systematic Assessment for Resilience (SAR) framework (Wadi et al., 2024). The results of the study by Wadi et at., (2024) indicated that the use of resilience-building strategies notably enhanced students’ psychological well-being and lessened stressors tied to academic anxiety. This suggests that promoting resilience through organized interventions can effectively address issues of learned helplessness in schools. By providing students with coping tools, these programs empower them to engage actively in their learning processes and disrupt the cycle of helplessness and anxiety. Additionally, resilience-building strategies equip students not only to manage academic stress but also to adopt proactive learning approaches that promote a sense of control and competence in their educational experiences.

In summary, both learned helplessness and test anxiety together form significant barriers that may hinder academic success. Students who experience repeated failures develop a sense of powerlessness which leads to reduced motivation levels and academic disengagement that produces poor academic performance. The self-reinforcing pattern of helplessness and anxiety demonstrates why early intervention is essential. Research demonstrates that structured resilience-building programs such as the Systematic Assessment for Resilience (SAR) framework successfully interrupt this negative cycle (Wadi et al., 2024). These programs offer students resilience tools which help them reclaim control and improve both their mental health and academic performance. Implementing resilience-building strategies shows potential for reducing the negative impacts of learned helplessness and test anxiety in educational settings.

Failings and Limitations

Behaviourism was the bread and butter of education for many years, but it had its failings. While it was a dominant psychological belief from the 1920s up until the 1950s, it fell apart for a number of reasons, many were well displayed in education. First is its failure to explain complex human behaviour, due to its philosophy of avoiding nearly anything related to mental states or internal mechanisms outside of association and practised learning (Graham, 2023). This is exemplified by the behaviourist’s belief about language which they say is learned through imitation (Tomic, 1993). This proved false as young children learn languages at an extremely fast rate while understanding a massive number of sentences they had never heard before. Children merely need to learn some linguistic rules before being able to speak entire sentences. Behaviourism is mostly used in lab settings, and not natural environments such as schools where all manner of unpredictable events can happen. As mentioned before, Behaviourism neglects internal processes, not only as a supposition of an ephemeral concept or mechanism but also in neuroscientific research. The approach ignores the study of neural pathways, activity, and structure (Graham, 2023). In the classroom, behaviourism relied heavily on punishment and reward, these were used as extrinsic motivation which undermined any form of intrinsic motivation and caused children to lose personal interest in the subjects (Ng’andu et al., 2013). If a child is constantly rewarded for something they would otherwise do with no need for reward, they learn to only do those actions when a reward is offered. They also receive less joy than they would have before the reward system. It is also almost impossible to give rewards and punishments effectively to a whole class when there are so many students, that only the actions directly witnessed by the teacher would have consequences (Ng’andu et al., 2013). In the end, it is the overbearing focus on “Pure” observations that so strongly limits behaviourism. This led to the Cognitive Revolution, where Behaviourism was replaced by Cognitive Psychology, which studied and took into account these internal mechanisms (Graham, 2023). This replacement happened for good reason and was widespread with nearly every part of behaviourism slowly uprooted and replaced. Only a few holdouts remain in the education system and those proved to be too useful to discard. Behaviourism, with its positives and negatives taken into account, hadn’t worked to satisfaction and was shown the door, and this was ultimately a good thing.

Conclusion:

Now then, we hope that you’ve enjoyed and learned from our writings, and that you now know much more about how Behaviourist Theory has been infused in education systems worldwide. And that even with the advent of Cognitive Theory slowly taking its precedence, its wake is still easily felt today in testing culture and military training. From here we encourage that you further your own research through the text that this section is a part of, and of course by looking through our own resources below.

References:

이신성. (2020). [논문]행동주의 교육학에 대한 칸트주의적 비판. ScienceON; 충북대학교. (Lee Shinsung. (2020). [Thesis]Kantian Critique of Behaviorist Pedagogy. ScienceON; Chungbuk National University.) https://scienceon.kisti.re.kr/srch/selectPORSrchArticle.do?cn=DIKO0015515275&utm_source=chatgpt.com

Murray, H., Grey, N., Warnock-Parkes, E., Kerr, A., Wild, J., Clark, D. M., & Ehlers, A. (2022). Ten misconceptions about trauma-focused CBT for PTSD. The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist, 15, e33. doi:10.1017/S1754470X22000307

Bonner M, Ellender G. Military Training: does it predispose service personnel to negative mental health issues? JMent Health Disord. 2022;2(1):11-18.

Heward, C., Li, W., Chun Tie, Y., & Waterworth, P. (2024). A scoping review of military culture, military identity, and Mental Health Outcomes in military personnel. Military Medicine, 189(11–12). https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usae276

Khudayberganov Kudrat Bazarbayevich. (2023) EPRA International Journal of Research & Development (IJRD). https://doi.org/10.36713/epra2016

Graham, G. (2023, January 13). Behaviorism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Stanford.edu. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/behaviorism/

L’Abbe, J. E. (1999). Self-efficacy and learned helplessness as predictors of premature termination of substance abuse treatment [ProQuest Information & Learning]. In Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering (Vol. 60, Issue 2–B, p. 0834).

Wang, C.-Y., Zhang, K., & Zhang, M. (2017). Dysfunctional attitudes, learned helplessness, and coping styles among men with substance use disorders. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 45(2), 269–280. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.5825

Abak, M. (2023). Prediction of learned helplessness based on academic resilience and test anxiety in students with academic failure. Iranian Journal of Educational Research, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.22034/2.1.1

Akca, F. (2011). The relationship between test anxiety and learned helplessness. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 39(1), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2011.39.1.101

Seligman, M E. (1972). Learned helplessness. Annual Review of Medicine, 23(1), 407–412. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.me.23.020172.002203

Seligman, Martin E., & Maier, S. F. (1967). Failure to escape traumatic shock. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0024514

Wadi, M., Shorbagi, A., Shorbagi, S., Taha, M. H., & Bahri Yusoff, M. S. (2024). The impact of the systematic assessment for resilience (SAR) framework on students’ resilience, anxiety, depression, burnout, and academic-related stress: A quasi-experimental study. BMC Medical Education, 24(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05444-9

Lee, C. J., Kim, Y., & Byun, S. Y. (2012). The rise of Korean education from the ashes of the Korean War. Prospects, 42, 303-318.

Lee, Shinsung. (2020). [Thesis]Kantian Critique of Behaviorist Pedagogy. ScienceON; Chungbuk National University.

Kang, I., Choi, J. I., & Chang, K. (2007). Constructivist research in educational technology: A retrospective view and future prospects. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8, 397-412.

Kim, M. (2004). Teachers’ philosophical orientation and practices: a study of novice preschool teachers in South Korea. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 5(3), 276-292.

Sorensen, C. W. (2023). The paradoxical effect of democratisation on the South Korean education system in the 1980s and early 1990s. History of Education, 52(4), 649-669.

Tomic, W. (1993). Behaviorism and cognitivism in education. PSYCHOLOGY-SAVANNAH-, 30, 38-38.

Ng’andu, K., Hambulo, F., Haambokoma, N., & Tomaida, M. (2013). The Contribution of Behavioral Theories of Learning to Education. Zambia Journal of Education, 4(1), 58–74. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341313372_The_Contribution_of_Behavioral_Theories_of_Learning_to_Education

Tomic, W. (1993). BEHAVIORISM AND COGNITIVISM IN EDUCATION. Psychology, 30, 38–46. http://dspace.ou.nl/bitstream/1820/3210/1/BEHAVIORISM%20AND%20COGNITIVISM%20IN%20EDUCATION.pdf

Hwang, H. S. (1998). Constructivism: A Shifting Paradigm for Educational Practice in Information Society. Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education, 10(1), 100-113.