The Reblog below (from @theChalkface) has already garnered an initial reaction on Facebook, where Regina Claypool-Frey posted the link for comments.
I particularly admire and respect John Eshleman’s initial responses to this article, as he points out the advantages that PT has in avoiding ‘drill and kill’ practice methods. As Kent Johnston said (when I was at Morningside, “All practice without an AIM is Aimless!”)
Methods in education based on the principles of Behaviour Analysis have a long history of success. The writer seems to have thrown the word “behaviorism” in their title with little or no thought.
For examples to support this, please consult
Quotations from the posts on Facebook:
28 January at 05:46
“John Eshleman A lot of people have a misguided view of “practice.” In PT, we’ve clarified it a lot: practice needs to be focused, and have achievable goals (aims) and feedback and instruction. It’s best when it’s Particular, Rapid, Added, Counted, Timed, Informed, Charted, Errorful, Daily.”
28 January at 06:02
“John Eshleman Og often said to count at least two things when practicing: the ones you “got right” and the ones that “need improvement.” Corrects and “NI’s” (enn-eyes) as I put it. That way you can get a learning picture (or, perhaps, a practice picture), and can set goals for both the corrects and the NI’s.”
End of Quotations