The main aim of the analysis was to check “the academic performance of undergraduate students in two special education college courses” (Bahadourian et al., 2006, p. 246). The independent variables of the investigation were written learn units, and the dependent variables of the research were student grade achievements. However, the strengths and limitations of the research should be considered.
Thus, there was not enough hard data on the effectiveness of behavioral analysis. On the other hand, there are many students whose literacy skills are to be improved. Unfortunately, teacher salaries do not impact on educational outcomes improvement. Another important point is that the task a student is to perform should correspond to the optimum rate. Academic learning time is another factor, which is to be considered as one of the obstacles of investigation.
The strengths of the research can’t be neglected. Thus, one of the most important points, which is to be discussed, is the so-called active student responding. The variable influences the academic responding of a student. In other words, there are greater opportunities, which cause the success of academic responding by the students. The investigation proved that “low-tech strategies, namely response cards, choral responding, and guided notes” influence the frequency of ASR. It was also proved that “when the supervisor delivered
flawless verbal and written antecedents, response opportunities, and consequences to the teachers, correct teacher and student responding increased” (Bahadourian et al., 2006, p. 249). Generally, student behavior opportunities depend upon the teachers who perform the task. Thus, the students, whose teachers are active, have more chances to succeed. Significant deficiencies in academic responses depend also upon the psychological conditions a student experiences. The success of the research depended upon an effective independent variable.
Another research I want to discuss is related to procrastination. This phenomenon is considered to be one of the most widespread reasons for a student’s failure. Some students keep in mind deadlines to overcome procrastination. In other words, to control procrastination people are to set deadlines. Ariely & Wertenbroch (2001) are of the opinion that “Using performance measures, we can test not only whether people use self-imposed deadlines as precommitment mechanisms, but also whether or not these mechanisms improve performance” (p. 5).
The students took part in the experiment. There were the students in the no-choice section, and those, who were in the free-choice section. In other words, some students are to perform the tasks when they are ready to do it; others are to perform certain tasks in three days. “By setting the deadlines as late as possible, the students would have the most time to work on the papers, the highest flexibility in arranging their workload, and the opportunity to learn the most about the topic before submitting the papers” (Ariely & Wertenbroch, 2001, p. 7). The investigation showed that private deadlines were less effective.
Another research I want to touch on is a student’s motivation. Thus, motivation is recognized to be one of the key aspects of a student’s success. McClure & Spector (n.d.) state that “studies concerning grade inflation are biased whenever variations in student motivation are embedded in the data, but not controlled for statistically” (p. 6). The grading system is considered to be one of the key aspects, which impacts on motivation.
Thus, one can state that strict deadlines, a student’s motivation and written learning units are not only the constituent parts of an educational process but also the aspects a student’s success depends upon.
References:
Ariely, D., & Wertenbroch, K. (2001). Procrastination, Deadlines, and Performance: Self-Control by Precommitment. Web.
Bahadourian, A., Tam, K., Greer, D., & Rousseau, M. (2006). The Effects of Learn Units on Students Performance in Two College Courses. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, v2 n2 p.246-264 2006.
McClure, J., & Spector, L. (n.d). Plus/Minus Grading and Motivation: An Empirical Study of Student Choice and Performance. Web.