Editing B. F. Skinner (section)

=== Teaching machine ===
[[Image:Skinner teaching machine 01.jpg|thumb|right|The teaching machine, a mechanical invention to automate the task of [[programmed learning]]]]

The [[teaching machine]] was a [[mechanical device]] whose purpose was to administer a curriculum of [[programmed learning]]. The machine embodies key elements of Skinner's theory of learning and had important implications for education in general and classroom instruction in particular.<ref name=":1">{{cite journal|last=Skinner|first=B. F.|title=Why we need teaching machines|journal=Harvard Educational Review|year=1961|volume=31|pages=377–398}}</ref>

In one incarnation, the machine was a box that housed a list of questions that could be viewed one at a time through a small window. (see picture.) There was also a mechanism through which the learner could respond to each question. Upon delivering a correct answer, the learner would be rewarded.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://faculty.coe.uh.edu/smcneil/cuin6373/idhistory/1950.html|title=Programmed Instruction and Task Analysis|publisher=College of Education, University of Houston|access-date=September 24, 2012|archive-date=June 1, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190601003908/http://faculty.coe.uh.edu/smcneil/cuin6373/idhistory/1950.html|url-status=dead}}</ref>

Skinner advocated the use of teaching machines for a broad range of students (e.g., preschool aged to adult) and instructional purposes (e.g., reading and music). For example, one machine that he envisioned could teach rhythm. He wrote:<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Skinner|first1=B.F.|year=1961|title=Teaching machines|journal=Scientific American|volume=205|issue=3|pages=90–112|doi=10.2307/1926170|jstor=1926170|pmid=13913636}}</ref>{{blockquote|A relatively simple device supplies the necessary contingencies. The student taps a rhythmic pattern in unison with the device. "Unison" is specified very loosely at first (the student can be a little early or late at each tap) but the specifications are slowly sharpened. The process is repeated for various speeds and patterns. In another arrangement, the student echoes rhythmic patterns sounded by the machine, though not in unison, and again the specifications for an accurate reproduction are progressively sharpened. Rhythmic patterns can also be brought under the control of a printed score.}}The instructional potential of the teaching machine stemmed from several factors: it provided automatic, immediate and regular reinforcement without the use of aversive control; the material presented was coherent, yet varied and novel; the pace of learning could be adjusted to suit the individual. As a result, students were interested, attentive, and learned efficiently by producing the desired behavior, "learning by doing."<ref>Skinner, B. F., and J. Holland. 1961. ''The Analysis of Behavior: A Program for Self Instruction''. p. 387.</ref>

Teaching machines, though perhaps rudimentary, were not rigid instruments of instruction. They could be adjusted and improved based upon the students' performance. For example, if a student made many incorrect responses, the machine could be reprogrammed to provide less advanced prompts or questions—the idea being that students acquire behaviors most efficiently if they make few errors. Multiple-choice formats were not well-suited for teaching machines because they tended to increase student mistakes, and the contingencies of reinforcement were relatively uncontrolled.

Not only useful in teaching explicit skills, machines could also promote the development of a repertoire of behaviors that Skinner called self-management. Effective self-management means attending to stimuli appropriate to a task, avoiding distractions, reducing the opportunity of reward for competing behaviors, and so on. For example, machines encourage students to pay attention before receiving a reward. Skinner contrasted this with the common classroom practice of initially capturing students' attention (e.g., with a lively video) and delivering a reward (e.g., entertainment) before the students have actually performed any relevant behavior. This practice fails to reinforce correct behavior and actually counters the development of self-management.

Skinner pioneered the use of teaching machines in the classroom, especially at the primary level. Today computers run software that performs similar teaching tasks, and there has been a resurgence of interest in the topic related to the development of adaptive learning systems.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://philmcrae.com/2/post/2013/04/rebirth-of-the-teaching-maching-through-the-seduction-of-data-analytics-this-time-its-personal1.html|title=Rebirth of the Teaching Machine through the Seduction of Data Analytics: This Time It's Personal |date=April 14, 2013 |website=Philip McRae, Ph.D.}}</ref>