In the early 1800s, Joseph Lancaster (1778-1838) developed an inexpensive method of educating large numbers of the poor in England. Referred to as the "monitorial system," his method utilized students as monitors who performed many of the tasks normally undertaken by a teacher; it was used to teach classes that often exceeded a thousand students at one time. Student monitors were responsible for teaching and evaluating small roups of individuals in a somewhat regimented fashion. An incentive system was afso used in a manner that closely resembles current applications of positive reinforcement in educational settings. Lancaster devised a token economy in which students earned tangible reinforcers for academic performance and deportment. Interestingly, the system spread quickly in the 1800s, and was implemented in many countries throughout the world. Its use declined as a result of both specific sources of dissatisfaction, such as the lack of individualization and dependence upon rote memorization, and general changes in the philosophy of education.
Reinforcement techniques in the classroom constitute one of the most widely researched areas in contemporary behavior modification.' The techniques have been derived from operant conditioning, which has been the subject of extensive experimental research. Operant techniques have been applied in the classroom for approximately ten years and would thus seem to represent a recent advance in classroom technology. Long before the development of operant conditioning, however, sophisticated methods closely resembling contemporary behavior-modification programs existed. One such program was developed by Joseph Lancaster (1 778-1 838).
In 1798, Lancaster opened a school in Southwark, England. The presence of a large, uneducated, lower-class populace, which resulted from the growth of large manufacturing centers during the Industrial Revolution, led many church groups and philanthropists to look for efficient means of educating the masses. The aristocracy and the middle class were educated in private schools, but working-class children only had access to the dame schools (those run by women in their own homes) or the Sunday schools. These schools were considered inefficient because they lacked organized instruction and qualified educators.* The Sunday schools were organized by Robert Raikes, a mill-owner in Gloucester, for poor children who worked six days a week. On Sundays, children were taught reading and mathematics and went on educational outings. The system depended on philanthropy for financial support. Even though a society was formed to help maintain the schools, formidable costs, a scarcity of competent teachers, and the inadequacy of weekly instruction caused the Sunday school movement to decline.s Legislation in England soon began to regulate child labor. The Health and Morals of Apprentices Act of 1802 limited the workday to twelve hours and designated that during the first four years of apprenticeship part of each day would be spent in a school.' Grahams Bill of 1833 limited eight-to thirteen-year-olds who worked in factories to a