ppt presentation (without sound) PSY of learning 5-6 double-spaced pages in length


Question Description

For this assignment you will be stepping into the role of “expert”. You are one, of many, training specialists in your company and have been asked to submit a proposal for a training module for managers on how to meet the learning needs of their departmental employees.

NOTE: You don't need to do audio, read all the FAQ's.

The title of your proposed training will be "The Importance of Understanding Your Employees’/Learners' Needs" and it will include two parts: the written portion and the “pitch”, which will be submitted as a screencast presentation that includes audio and visuals.

Part One: The Written Assignment

For the written portion of your final assignment, you will research and critically explain five topics (areas of content) in learning that you think would be important to teach others. These components will be aligned with the course content and the following Learning Theories:

  • Behaviorism – repetition, reinforcement (feedback), association, and classical and operant conditioning
  • Cognitivism – assimilation, accommodation, the information processing model, and intellectual stimulation
  • Constructivism – scaffolding, metacognition, problem-solving and inquiry-based learning
  • Humanism – holism, personal agency, individualization, and motivation

The five learning perspectives/principles you decide to focus on is up to you. In week four you submitted seven ideas to your instructor. Be sure to read this feedback to accurately choose the five you will use in the final.

The second requirement of the written assignment includes explaining five strategies that you would use if you were to teach/train the assigned managers. For example, you may want to use scaffolding or the use of rewards. Fully explain why you will use each of the strategies you choose and how they support the assigned employee groupView in a new window. In week four you submitted seven ideas. Be sure to look at your instructor feedback and choose the strategies that you feel would be the most important.

Required content elements of the written assignment:

  1. Must begin with an introduction paragraph that includes an overall summary of the purpose of the assignment.
  2. Five areas of learning psychology content must be explained fully and clearly demonstrate your understanding of the included content and its importance in understanding learners’ needs. As you explain your learning perspectives/principles, critically and elaborately justify why you have chosen them based on your learner group.
  3. Five strategies, for which you would use to successfully train the learner group, must be fully developed, including the rationales for how these strategies might be used, based on critical thought. Discussion of the specific needs these managers may have to fully benefit from your training module should also be included.
  4. A conclusion paragraph or section that fully summarizes the information within the paper and also includes the time frame that you predict it will take to complete the training (i.e. two weeks, one year, etc.) Substantiate this time frame with creative and critical thoughts about how your learners will best retain the information you want to teach them.
  5. Apply basic research methods and gather resources that will support your content.

Required technical elements of your written assignment:

  • Must be five to six double-spaced pages in length, excluding title page and references, and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
  • Must include a title page with the following:
    • Title of presentation
    • Student’s name
    • Course name and number
    • Instructor’s name
    • Date submitted
    • URL link to your screencast
  • Must use at least four scholarly sources from the Ashford University Library.
  • Must document all sources in APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
  • Must include a separate reference page that is formatted according to APA style

Part Two: The Final Presentation

After completing your paper, it will be time to “sell your idea” to the company. You will create a presentation with the goal of having your training module chosen for use by the company to train its management teams. For this presentation, you will produce a screencast presentation, much like what you created in Week Three. You will only be allotted five minutes for your presentation, so you will need to showcase your ideas effectively. Learning how to market yourself and sell your ideas will be extremely advantageous to you in your current and/or future career, so you should think outside of the box and be as creative as possible in the presentation portion of this final assignment. Additionally, this final assignment will help you build technical skills that will potentially aid you in your current and/or future career.

Consider the following questions as you create your presentation:

  • How will your training module “win out” over the other candidates for this project?
  • What makes your training module great?
  • In what ways are you able to meet all of your learners’ special needs?
  • Is your training engaging? Why?
  • How does your training consider the diversity of the learners?
  • How does your training consider items such as the time it takes to go through each module and/or how it will impact employee work productivity?
  • In real life, this pitch could mean a big promotion or bonus. How will you get this promotion?

Presentation required elements:

  1. Visuals, audio, and a web link for access.
  2. Discussion of a minimum of five areas of learning content you have studied in this course, which you included in your paper and applied to the development of activities you created for your training.
  3. Discussion of the needs of your learners that were considered.
  4. An outline of the strategies you have suggested in your paper and why you think these will be successful when working with the assigned manager group.
  5. A brief analysis of why it is important to apply learning theory to training/educating in organizational settings.
  6. The reason why you believe that your training would be the best option for the company to choose.
  7. A reference slide (This slide does not require audio.)
  8. Five minutes in length maximum.
  9. Discuss your ideas and content as you would if you were standing in front of a group. Try to not simply read your slides.
  10. Create a professional in appearance presentation.
  11. Exhibit confidence in your voice when discussing the proposed training.
  12. Utilization of four scholarly sources. (These may be the same as in your paper.)
  13. All sources used within the presentation must be cited properly.


  1. Do I have to use a script?
    • Please note that although a script is not required, it can be useful to make sure your audio is clear and confident.
  2. What if I do not have a microphone?
    • If you do not have an internal or external microphone for your computer, you can also use your ear buds, plugged into the microphone slot.
  3. What if I like to use Prezi instead of PowerPoint?
    • You may use a number of tools to create the visual portion of your presentation (i.e. PowerPoint, Jing, Google Drive, Prezi, etc.).
  4. How many slides should I have?
    • There is no specific requirement, just please consider that approximately six to eight slides would support your time limit.
  5. What do I use to include the audio on my presentation?
    • To create your presentation with the required visual, audio, and website link, you may use any number of options which might include Screencast-O-Matic, or Youtube, but you are not limited to these options. You may choose to use any tool that you choose, as long as the presentation can be fully viewed and listened to by way of a web link. Please include a title for your presentation in the description box when you publish your screencast to the web.
  6. I cannot figure out any of the online software tools. What do I do?
    • Second option for your presentation : If you are unable to access any screencast software, you may also choose to create a PowerPoint self-running presentation; however please note that you must also consider the timing of your audio to automatically play with each slide. The following links can assist you if you choose this option.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

7 Punishment Learning Objectives After reading this chapter, you should be able to do the following: • Identify methodological issues concerning the best way to study punishment. • Explain the long-term effects of punishment and examine the experimental evidence for its efficacy. • Understand the principles that make punishment effective: intensity, delay, schedule, stimulus control, and the provision of verbal explanation. • Describe possible harmful side effects of punishment, such as learned helplessness and increases in aggression. • Outline possible alternatives to punishment, including the reinforcement of good behavior, time-out, and extinction. lie6674X_07_c07_231-264.indd 231 4/9/12 8:24 AM Section 7.1 Principles of Punishment CHAPTER 7 Of several responses made to the same situation . . . those which are accompanied or closely followed by discomfort to the animal will, other things being equal, have their connection with the situation weakened, so that, when it recurs, they will be less likely to occur. (Edward L. Thorndike, Animal Intelligence, 1911, p. 244) We are gradually discovering—at an untold cost in human suffering—that in the long run punishment doesn’t reduce the probability that an act will occur. (B. F. Skinner, Walden Two, 1948a) Punishment is one of society’s oldest techniques for controlling behavior, and also one of its most controversial. Does it really work? If we spank a child for disobeying an order or send an adult to prison for stealing, will the treatment really be effective? Or are we only building up a reservoir of hostility and bitterness that will lead to even more antisocial behavior in the future? 7.1 Principles of Punishment Because punishment involves painful consequences, no one likes to be punished, and that makes studying punishment in the laboratory difficult. We will begin our discussion of punishment, therefore, by looking at the arguments for and against such experiments, and at possible alternatives. Definitions We first need to define what we mean by punishment. Broadly, punishment refers to use of an aversive consequence to reduce the likelihood of a response. However, psychologists have distinguished between two types of punishment, positive punishment and negative punishment, which differ as to whether the aversive state is brought about by presenting a stimulus or removing it. In positive punishment—normally just called punishment— the suppression of a response is due to the presentation of a stimulus. A spanking would be an example of positive punishment, as it involves the presentation of an aversive stimulus. In negative punishment, sup- Receiving a parking ticket is a form of negative punishment. It is pression of a response is due to punishment because the effect will be to reduce the likelihood removal of a stimulus. A park- of your parking illegally; it is called negative punishment because ing fine would be an example of it is achieved by removing a stimulus—in this case, money. lie6674X_07_c07_231-264.indd 232 3/15/12 7:58 AM Section 7.1 Principles of Punishment CHAPTER 7 negative punishment, as the aversive state is caused by taking away money. In both cases the outcome is suppression of a behavior; they differ simply in whether this is achieved by presenting a stimulus or removing it. As we saw in Chapter 4, a similar distinction is made in the case of reinforcement, where positive reinforcement refers to a strengthening of behavior achieved by presenting a stimulus, and negative reinforcement refers to a strengthening of behavior achieved by removing a stimulus. You may find it easier to remember the meaning of all these terms if you distinguish between the method used (is a stimulus presented or removed?) and the outcome (is a behavior strengthened or weakened?). Reinforcement involves strengthening a response and punishment involves weakening it; the terms positive and negative indicate whether this is achieved by presenting (adding) a stimulus or removing (subtracting) it. You can test your understanding of these distinctions by answering the following question: Is negative reinforcement a form of punishment? The correct answer is no. Negative reinforcement is still reinforcement; the qualifier negative simply means that this strengthening is achieved by removing a stimulus. If you answered this incorrectly, you might take some comfort from the fact that this mistake is very common, and even appears in some textbooks. To avoid it, just remember that reinforcement always refers to strengthening, and punishment always refers to weakening. Observation Versus Experiment There is no lack of debate over the effectiveness of punishment, but rarely can either side produce unequivocal evidence to support its position. This is perhaps not surprising. How, after all, can we evaluate the long-term effects of punishment? Consider spanking as an example: It might seem easy enough to compare the behavior of children who are spanked with those who are not, but in practice such data are often difficult to interpret. In a study by Eron, Walder, Toigo, and Lefkowitz (1963), for example, parents of 451 schoolchildren were interviewed to find out what kinds of punishment they used in different situations. If their children were rude, for example, they were asked whether they would say, “Young men (ladies) don’t do that sort of thing,” or “Get on that chair and don’t move until you apologize,” or would spank Some studies point to the fact that children who are punished will in turn act aggressively towards others. This danger is greater the child until he or she cried. when more severe punishments such as spanking are used. The researchers found that the lie6674X_07_c07_231-264.indd 233 3/15/12 7:58 AM Section 7.1 Principles of Punishment CHAPTER 7 harsher the punishment chosen by the parents, the more likely the children were to be aggressive at school. Punishing bad behavior, in other words, seemed to increase the frequency of this behavior rather than reduce it. As we shall see later, there is some support for this conclusion, but this study poses serious problems of interpretation. First, even though parents say they would use a certain form of punishment, this does not necessarily mean they actually do so. And even if they did, we cannot be sure that it was their use of this punishment that made their children aggressive. Might not some other aspects of the parents’ behavior—a lack of love or concern, for example—have produced both the parents’ punitiveness and the child’s aggression? Or perhaps the causal relationship is reversed: Perhaps the children’s persistent aggression and disobedience, produced by other causes, progressively forced the parents to use punishments of ever-increasing severity. The fact that punishment and aggression are correlated, in other words, does not necessarily mean that punishment caused the aggression. Thus, although studies based on questionnaires or on more direct forms of observation can be an important source of hypotheses about causal relationships, it is difficult to reach unequivocal conclusions by observing behavior in a complex social environment. Animals Versus Humans The obvious alternative is experimentation under the controlled conditions of the laboratory. For punishment, though, this raises serious problems. For obvious reasons, psychologists are extremely reluctant to use severe punishment in studies that involve human subjects. If punishment is to be studied in the laboratory, therefore, we must either use very mild punishments, such as verbal rebukes, or employ animals as our subjects. Each of these alternatives has its drawbacks. It is certainly useful to know how a child will react to being told “No, that’s wrong” by a stranger, but this might not be a reliable guide to the effects of being spanked by an enraged parent. So, what about the option of using animals as experimental subjects? As we have already seen, there are many similarities in the laws of learning across different species. But by no stretch of the imagination could a human being be described simply as a very large rat. In addition, this discussion does not even take into account the public reaction against using animals in shock and other “violent” experiments. In trying to determine the effects of severe punishment, then, is it better to extrapolate from the effects of mild punishment in humans or severe punishment in animals? In practice, psychologists have resolved this dilemma by using both approaches; in this chapter we will look at the results obtained with each, and at the extent to which they have contributed to a unified picture of the effects of punishment. We will begin by examining the effects of punishment on the punished response and consider whether punishment really produces long-term suppression of behavior. We will then consider the effects of punishment on other behavior; that is, even in situations in which punishment does suppress the punished response, might it have side effects that would make its use inadvisable? Finally, we will consider the implications of this research on how parents and teachers should respond when children misbehave. lie6674X_07_c07_231-264.indd 234 3/15/12 7:58 AM Section 7.1 Principles of Punishment CHAPTER 7 Is Punishment Effective? We have argued that by studying punishment under controlled conditions, it should be considerably easier to determine its effects. So what does this research tell us about whether punishment is effective? Bar Pressing in Rats The early evidence was largely negative, suggesting that punishment had little or no effect on behavior. Thorndike, who had accorded punishment equal status with reinforcement in his first statement of the Law of Effect, was convinced by his own subsequent research that punishment led to no permanent reduction in behavior. Similarly, B. F. Skinner (1938) was persuaded by his research with rats that the effects of punishment were at best only temporary. In one of Skinner’s experiments, a group of rats was first trained to press a bar to obtain food, then presentations of the food were discontinued. This is known as an extinction procedure; the typical result is a gradual decrease in responding, until subjects eventually stop responding altogether. To evaluate the effects of punishment, Skinner divided his subjects into two groups during the extinction phase, with subjects in one of the groups being punished every time they pressed the bar during the first 10 minutes of extinction. The punishment consisted of a slap on the rat’s paw. Figure 7.1 shows the cumulative number of responses made during extinction. Initially, the punishment contingency appeared highly effective; subjects in the punishment group stopped A photograph of B. F. Skinner in 1933. responding for as long as it was in effect. After the punishment period ended, however, they gradually began to respond again, until by the end of the second session they had emitted the same total number of responses during extinction as subjects in the extinction group who had never been punished. Punishment, in other words, seemed to suppress responding only temporarily, leading Skinner and others to conclude that it was an ineffective and undesirable technique for changing behavior. lie6674X_07_c07_231-264.indd 235 3/15/12 7:58 AM CHAPTER 7 Section 7.1 Principles of Punishment Figure 7.1: The effect of punishment on responding during extinction Cumulative Responses second day 200 extinction 150 extinction+punishment 100 paw slap 50 0 0 20 40 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 100 Time (minutes) Bar-presses during the first 10 minutes were punished in the punishment group but not in the extinction group. The figure plots the cumulative number of responses during extinction, so that a horizontal line indicates a period without responding. Source: Data from Skinner, 1938 This conclusion was based on very little evidence. Because of their reluctance to inflict pain, most experimenters either avoided punishment altogether or chose relatively mild stimuli as their punishers. As we have mentioned, Skinner used a slap on the paw to punish his rats, and Thorndike’s conclusions were based on experiments with humans using the word “wrong” as the aversive event. Only in the past few decades have experiments using more intense punishers been reported in any number, and the effect has been a dramatic reversal of the earlier negative conclusions: At least insofar as the white rat is concerned, compelling evidence now indicates that punishment can produce powerful and enduring suppression of behavior. Boe and Church (1967), for example, repeated Skinner’s bar-pressing experiment but used electric shock as the punishing event in place of a slap on the paw. To evaluate the importance of punishment severity, they varied the intensity of the shock for different groups from 0 to 220 volts. (One should keep in mind that although the shock used in this study was undoubtedly aversive, it was not as intense as it sounds. The aversiveness of a shock depends on the amount of current passing through the body rather than on the shock voltage; under the conditions of this study, the shocks were intense but not physically harmful.) The measure of responding was the cumulative number of responses during extinction, expressed as a percentage of responding during the last session of training. In the 220-volt group, for example, the total lie6674X_07_c07_231-264.indd 236 3/15/12 7:58 AM CHAPTER 7 Section 7.1 Principles of Punishment number of responses during extinction was less than 10% of responses during the final session of reinforcement. With mild intensities of shock, the results resembled those obtained by Skinner, as Figure 7.2 shows. The brief period of shock at the end of a training session lasting only fifteen minutes produced little enduring reduction in the number of responses emitted during extinction. As the intensity of the shock was increased, however, the effect on subsequent responding became increasingly pronounced, until, in the 220-volt group, responding was not only suppressed during the punishment period but showed virtually no signs of recovery over nine subsequent sessions. When the punishment used was of sufficient severity, in other words, even a brief period of punishment resulted in profound and enduring suppression of behavior. Cumulative Response (percent) Figure 7.2: The effect of shock intensity on responses during extinction 70 60 control 35V 50V 75V 120V 220V 50 40 30 20 10 0 P1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Extinction Sessions Different groups received shocks ranging in intensity from 0 volts (the control group) to 220 volts during a 15-minute period at the beginning of extinction, marked P on the x-axis. The measure of responding was the cumulative number of responses during extinction, expressed as a percentage of responding during the last session of training. In the 220-volt group, for example, the total number of responses during extinction was less than 10% of responses during the final session of reinforcement. Source: Data from Boe & Church, 1967 lie6674X_07_c07_231-264.indd 237 3/15/12 7:58 AM Section 7.1 Principles of Punishment CHAPTER 7 Self-Injurious Behavior in Humans Are the effects of intense punishment on humans the same as those observed on animals? For obvious reasons, the data on this point are limited, but the evidence we do have suggests a number of similarities. In a clinical study reported by Bucher and Lovaas (1968), for example, electric shock was used to treat self-injurious behavior in autistic children. (See Chapter 6 for a discussion of autism.) One of the most horrifying manifestations of this syndrome is self-injurious behavior, in which children repeatedly and viciously attack their own bodies. In the case of a seven-year-old boy named John, the resultant physical damage was so serious that he had to be hospitalized and kept in complete physical restraint 24 hours a day. “When removed from restraint he would immediately hit his head against the crib, beat his head with his fists, and scream. . . He was so unmanageable that he had to be fed in full restraints; he would not take food otherwise. His head was covered with scar tissue, and his ears were swollen and bleeding” (Bucher & Lovaas, 1968, p. 86). Because of the risk of permanent physical damage resulting from continued confinement, it was vital that some way be found to eliminate this behavior as quickly as possible. One technique that had previously been found to be effective consisted of ignoring the selfinjurious behavior (thereby eliminating adult attention as a possible source of reinforcement) and simultaneously rewarding incompatible behaviors such as hand-clapping or singing songs. Because of the particular circumstances involved, however, this approach was not feasible, and Bucher and Lovaas decided instead to use punishment. This might at first seem to be a bizarre choice of treatment because John’s behavior suggested that, if anything, he enjoyed being hurt. Nevertheless, once a day John was taken to a special room where his restraints were removed, and he was given an immediate electric shock every time he hit himself. The results are shown in Figure 7.3, which plots the number of self-destructive responses observed during successive brief treatment sessions. During the first 15 baseline sessions, the experimenters did not administer punishment, and John hit himself an average of almost 250 times during each session. When punishment was introduced in session 16, however, this behavior disappeared almost immediately. lie6674X_07_c07_231-264.indd 238 3/15/12 7:58 AM CHAPTER 7 Section 7.1 Principles of Punishment Frequency of Self-Destructive Responses Figure 7.3: The frequency of self-destructive behavior before and after punishment 400 300 200 100 0 Sessions: Experimenter: 2 6 10 1 14 18 22 26 30 34 12 3 1 1 3 1 2 1 2 3 4 1 1 3 3 2 4 3 24 E E E 38 13 E The experimenter present during each session is indicated; experimenter 1 (E1) or experimenter 3 (E3) administered shocks during the sessions marked by an arrow. Source: Adapted from Bucher & Lovaas, 1968 To see if this suppression would prove lasting, the experimenters did not use punishment in some subsequent sessions, and John’s self-injurious behavior began to reappear. When this behavior was again punished, it was again suppressed, and it now remained suppressed. Using a total of only 12 shocks, Bucher and Lovaas were able to eliminate a response that had occurred previously at a rate of several thousand times a day for more than five years. Similar results were obtained with the other children treated. Principles Results such as these have made it clear that punishment can suppress behavior under at least some conditions. What, then, determines whether punishment will be effective? Intensity Boe and Church’s experiment showed that the effectiveness of a punishment with animals depends on its intensity, and similar results have been reported in humans. In a study by Williams, Kirkpatrick-Sanchez, and Iwata (1993), for example, the subject was a profoundly retarded young woman who engaged in self-mutilating behaviors such as hitting and biting her body and gouging her eyes. Initial treatment with a relatively mild form of shock was ineffective, but when her therapists switched to more intense shock, lie6674X_07_c07_231-264.indd 239 3/15/12 7:58 AM Section 7.1 Principles of Punishment CHAPTER 7 her self-injurious behavior was very rapidly suppressed, and staff were later able to maintain this suppression solely by using reprimands that had previously been paired with the shock. (This procedure, in which a stimulus paired with an aversive event itself becomes aversive, is called se ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Tutor Answer

School: New York University

hello buddy here's the final assignment in case there is an issue please let me know i will be glad to make any changes.


The Importance of Understanding Your Employees’/Learners’ Needs
Student’s Name

Course Name and Number
Instructor’s Name

Date Submitted

1. Introduction……………………………………………………………….3

2. The Importance of Understanding Learners……………………………3
a. Behaviorism………………………………………………………….3
b. Cognitivism………………………………………………………….3
c. Constructivism………………………………………………………4
d. Humanism………………………………………………………….4

3. Preparation for the Training…………………………………………5

4. Training Modules…………………………………………………….5
a. Learning Strategies………………………………………………….5
b. Learning Styles………………………………………………………..6
c. Learning about Multiple Intelligence…………………………………7
d. Learning about Diversity……………………………………………..7
5. Conclusion………………………………………………………………..7
6. References………………………………………………………………..9


Learning is the process within which behavior, skill, attitude and knowledge are changed
through exposure to information, experience and deliberate training (Galef & Whiten, 2017).
Managers have the role of ensuring that the organization’s resources have been delegated to
meet the needs of the employees. These needs include the need to learn and constantly
improve on their skills and performances.
The importance of Understanding Learners
It is important to understand learners and their different learning styles. The same as
personality differences, learning styles are immensely different (Cherry, 2017). Managers
are usually viewed as the mentors and leaders of a department and an organization in
general and they can massively influence their subordinates. In order to be able to
achieve this they have to understand themselves and how they learn and then they can be
able to influence and impact others positively. There are various theories that explain the
learning process;
a. Behaviourism
Based on the premise that with time people can be conditioned to certain predictable
outcomes simply by imposing a certain form of reinforcement, the perspective advocates for
learning, unlearning and relearning (Hutler et. al 2017). Negative reinforcement discourages
certain behavior while positive reinforcement encourages the behavior.
b. Cognitivism
Intellectual stimulation is very important as it triggers the bran to be able to absorb
new information (Coletta, 2011). By introducing new ways and procedures that are
convenient and employee friendly, it allows for the mind to be stimulated to accommodate


and process information (Kristinsdottir, 2011). The different managers have different
learning styles that can be used in the learning process.
c. Constructivism
Constructivism is founded on learner’s ability to construct meaning from what has been
taught by the instructor. Jimmy does not seem to be able to v...

flag Report DMCA

The tutor managed to follow the requirements for my assignment and helped me understand the concepts on it.

The tutor was knowledgeable, will be using the service again.

Awesome quality of the tutor. They were helpful and accommodating given my needs.


Brown University

1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology

2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University

982 Tutors

Columbia University

1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University

2113 Tutors

Emory University

2279 Tutors

Harvard University

599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2319 Tutors

New York University

1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University

1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University

2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University

932 Tutors

Princeton University

1211 Tutors

Stanford University

983 Tutors

University of California

1282 Tutors

Oxford University

123 Tutors

Yale University

2325 Tutors