ABSTRACT
In Chapter 1, we saw that those who tried to transform traditional practices within the framework of a behaviouristically based educational technology were in reality perpetuating a fundamentally traditionalist approach. Skinner himself and at least some of his followers (Bloom among others) do not see themselves in such a role. They argue that the results of conditioning trials, involving praise rather than blame, are liberalising in their practical effect in that they require the abolition of corporal punishment as inefficient 'negative reinforcement'. Moreover, the specification of syllabuses such as those of the Technician and Business Education Councils (TEC and BEC) in the United Kingdom, or of ROSBA in Australia, in terms of objectives can be seen as freeing teachers from strict syllabus requirements in terms of specific subject matter legislated from on high. For the moment, however, let us record that Skinner realises that there are at least three models of teaching which he downgrades to the status of , metaphors' rather than 'models' in his quest for an allegedly scientific status for his 'technology' of teaching. These metaphors or models he describes as (i) growth or development, (ii) acquisition and (iii) construction.
