Basically, the next step involves you and me and other readers supporting, perhaps even agitating for (Dare I say “campaigning for”?) establishing more university behaviorology programs and departments. We all require these to meet growing needs. (See the wanted poster at the end of this column, and show it to those people who are in positions to help.)
Many major businesses offer jobs, under various names, for “sustainability staff and managers.” Holders of a four–year bachelor’s degree in sustainability, one that includes a major in the natural science of behaviorology along with basic familiarity with all the other foundation natural sciences (i.e., physics, chemistry, and biology) would make exceptionally capable staff.
We have now come just about full circle. People’s increased understanding of behaviorology makes them move to apply it to the widest range of humanity’s individual and group concerns, using the behaviorological technologies that we can derive from the principles and concepts of this natural science of behavior. How can we help this happen?
Unbalanced educational playing fields present additional obstacles to solving global problems. Consider the resources lost when educational programs remain disrespectful of science. Societies that allow such programs also automatically allow wasted research funds to investigate what is not really there, while mis–training legions of students to replace the professionals expended on the crusade.
The behaviorological analysis of the contingencies surrounding protracted dying prompts new science–based practices related to ethics, person/body death, the easing of the bereavement of survivors, and especially the managing of the social–death experience in ways that reduce its negative impact for both the dying and survivors. A thorough discussion of such practices belongs to other more detailed sources (e.g., Prof. Fraley’s book on Dignified Dying…). Meanwhile this column emphasizes reducing the negative impact of the social–death experience.
We prefer appropriate behavior, which benefits from plenty of added reinforcement. We consider inconsequential behavior as relatively benign although annoying behavior that benefits from active ignoring.
Dr. Glenn Latham spent decades working with parents at home and teachers at school. He was discovering the particulars of some parent and teacher behaviors that affect much of the behavior and misbehavior of children. He also helped design many of the best practices that help change these parent and teacher behaviors so that they lead to more appropriate child behavior at home and school (references to some of his books appear at the end of this column).
The dining hall provides another venue to increase the amount of time spent in what feels like informally organized foreign–language practice. Designate some particular dining–hall tables as verbal–community tables. Again, for evaluation, if possible keep track of who sits at such tables and for which meals. Place a sign on each table indicating which foreign language those using the table will speak.
Here are more possible, and fun, methods especially adaptable to teaching in foreign–language programs in large educational settings. The setting size is relevant, because these methods work best with verbal communities, for each language, that are larger than a single full classroom of students.
Now we continue discussing easier, and even fun, scientific methods to improve success in teaching non–native language repertoires. The conditioning of each and all of the verbal relations never really stops as new response forms continually accrue. And that accrual resides in part on the exponential response growth that occurs due to the previously mentioned equivalence processes. (For curious readers, Chapter 18 of the reference describes these processes).
