On Critchfield’s proposal: Student concerns and recommendations

Bayles, Makenzie W.; Boutain, Ariana Ronis; Brandt, Julie A. Ackerlund; Call, Nicole; Dracobly, Joseph D.; Greer, Brian; Gureghian, Danielle L.; Harper, Amy Marie; Merritt, Todd Allen; Miller, Jonathan R.; Payne, Steven W.; Morris, Edward K.

doi:10.1007/bf03392271

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Students then read Tom Critchfield’s ( 2011 ) “Interesting Times: Practice, Science, and Professional Associations in Behavior Analysis,” which argues that the schism is natural. In the past, students disagreed with Critchfield and published a reply, which is the next reading, “On Critchfield’s Proposal” (Bayles et al, 2012 ), to which I added Susan Schneider’s ( 2012 ) “Common Goals for the Science and Practice of Behavior Analysis.” The third set of readings was on complementarities with behavior analysis. One was on feminism, where I assigned Maria Ruiz’s ( 1995 ) “B.…”

Section: Functional Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching a Course on the History of Behavior Analysis

Morris

2022

Perspect Behav Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teaching the history of behavior analysis can be approached in many ways. One is to embed history in courses on the field’s discipline and subdisciplines (e.g., its basic and applied sciences and their conceptual foundations) and practice. Another is to teach courses on the histories of the discipline and subdisciplines and practice. Still another is to teach a stand-alone course that includes these approaches and more (e.g., their integration, relations with other sciences, the influence of U.S. history and culture). The purpose of this article is to foster teaching the stand-alone course. It has four sections. The first addresses structural considerations: course titles, catalog descriptions, curricula, certification, and accreditation. The second addresses contextual considerations: purposes of teaching history; distinctions between history and historiography; and starting points in selecting textbooks. The third addresses functional considerations: course content organized by topics and their required and recommended readings. The fourth discusses how the course might be revised by eliminating topics (e.g., the Middle Ages), expanding topics and subtopics (e.g., the behaviorisms, philosophy of science) and adding topics and subtopics (e.g., institutional history; diversity, inclusion, and equity). Given the field’s continuing development as a science, system, and practice and the rapid growth in its number and variety of its members, its history is becoming its common core—and a means of teaching it. The course elucidates the field’s integrity; incorporates the entirety of its community of students, scientists, scholars, and practitioners; and advance its coherence as a cultural practice.

show abstract