Incentive learning, yay or nay?

As a big government liberal who will cheerfully spend everyone's money on just about any social program I can only say that this is a terrible waste of money.

Not just my money but your money too.

We tried that at home and it didn't work. Two of our kids wouldn't have cared how much we paid them. Not getting the money, being grounded from going out, the car, and the computer were worth it to them if they didn't have to study. They just didn't care and couldn't understand why they should. Our youngest, however, gets good grades because she wants to be successful and write her own ticket later; the money isn't needed and she's willing to make the investment now (and not end up like her brother and sister). That's my real-life experience.

My philosophical objection is that (especially with our older two) we're (or the school) telling them that simply meeting the minimum requirements warrants special treats. As left leaning as I've become in recent years, this is too much. They won't be in school forever and when they get out they will expect raises and special treatment for simply staying the course.

I think it's OK if the parents do it, but at school? Nay.

Does that mean my taxes will go up? Will the school budget need to be increased? Forget it.

Besides, are the teachers just giving up? They can't inspire the kids on their own so they have to bribe them?

I don't think it should be up to the schools to have to do this, their budgeting and financial states are usually bad enough as it is. I wouldn't want my tax money going toward some kid's incentive especially when I have my own to worry about.

But I do agree that kids need more incentive for school. My SO and I try very, very hard to keep school in a positive light for my step-daughter. We never use the phrase "You get to stay home today," because that implies going to school is a Bad Thing. It's always, "You have to stay home today, you're sick. You can go back when you feel better." Thus far, it's worked.

We do reward her for her good grades, and it doesn't have to be a monetary thing. A lot of praise will go a long way for kids (who haven't already been spoiled rotten and therefore expect some sort of reward). If we DO get her something, we just take her to the used book store and let her pick out a book, or we get her some drawing/activity books to further her learning. That way she's getting something she wants, and it's something to help improve her learning. She loves it and it's probably partially why she's in 2nd grade and has a 6th grade reading level.

(Alternatively, the Dollar Store works well, too. Probably not so much with older kids, I'd wager.)

An older kid/teen could always be given the chance to have some friends stay over for a mini-party or something if they do well on their grades. The answer doesn't have to always be "give them money."


Long story short -- incentives are given to adults for the work they do, so there's no reason kids shouldn't get something, too. But I don't think it's the responsibility of anyone but the parent.

Terrible idea. (I am a former school teacher, btw.)

The ideal motivator for kids should be: "A good education will enrich you and lead to a better life."

The not-so-ideal motivator that I am willing to settle for is: "If you don't go to school, you'll get arested for truency and sent to reform school."

But bribing kids??? It ruins everything education is suppsed to be. I don't mind parents bribing their kids, but no way should the government do it.

Another motivator that I haven't mentioned is that of relationship. If kids have meaningful relationships at school with either peers or teachers or both, they will WANT to go every day of the week, twice on Sundays, and all through the summer. But if they are AFRAID of school, feel alienated by it, victimized, even traumatized by it, they will do their best to avoid going, and when they are there they will be emotionally shut down and on the defensive. That's not an environment for learning, and certainly not one for healthy relationships.

So my ultimate soapbox is: smaller schools, smaller classes, more generous student-teacher ratios. Kids will feel safer with the increased presence of adult supervision, they behave better, and the bullies will be given less opportunity to BE bullies. The whole educational system will feel less like a giant machine that those poor kids need to navigate with their lives in their hands. The school buildings I propose will not be fortified fortresses full of armed police officers, metal detectors, and drug-sniffing dogs. In my vision for schools, each school will feel more like a small intimate community where everyone knows each other, kids have actual names and not numbers, and the constant fear kids of today have of each other will be non-existent.

Too much money to do it my way??? Well, how the hell much money does it cost to have three dozen security cameras running all the time, two cops on duty all day, a K-9 unit on standby, and two metal detectors at every entrance? And is THAT really an environment we want our kids in? Some might protest: "Yeah, but it's more cost-effective to have huge schools with security access and more kids per teacher per classroom." To that I say #1) Dammit, these are our kids, they are worth every penny, and #2) How many US governors, senators, and congressmen won't send their kids to a pubicc school? and why is that?

A lot of kids are immature. I know that's hard to believe. But they don't much care about consequences.

How does SusieQHighschooler's A+ benefit me in a way that I'm obliged to pay for it?

Answer: it doesn't...at all. It benefits SusieQ, and no one else. She should pay for that service herself, but b/c we're a generous nation, we give it to her free of charge.

Now what numbskull came up with the idea that she should be paid to receive this service?

I confess. I bribe my kids. I do it unashamedly too. I think it's great to reward kids for doing good jobs. They get money for making the honor roll. They get more money for making straight A's. I want them to learn that hard work pays off.

Do I think tax dollars should be used to do it? Heck NO!!

Of course I think the only thing government interference has done to education is lower the standards but that's just me. If parents or even local businesses want to offer incentive to kids for doing well in school I say bring it on. Just leave my tax dollars out of it.

It is the parents' responsibility to instill in their children not only a love for learning but the desire to succeed in school. Not the government's. Never the government's. The best way to make kids care more about their performance in school? Take away all those cell phones and laptops and playstations and ipods and substitute books. Good books. Start them off young and they will respond.

My daughters were taught to read at an early age. Because they were taught to believe that learning was not only fun but important, they maintained good grades and a healthy interest in their educations. My granddaughters are already being prepped by their mothers ( with me lurking behind) to do the same thing. THAT is where an interest in education begins--in the home. And giving a bunch of kids who've always gotten everything they asked for in this instant gratification society ten bucks for a "c" isn't going to turn them off the path originally set for them by their parents.

Hmmmm....

two issues here, should tax dollars be used to pay kids... Hell no.

However, money is a HUGE motivator for kids. The only kids that money does not motivate are kids that have money and get what they want, i.e they have an Xbox, dvd player, PS3, cell phone, computer, car, etc. etc or kids that know how to play their parents like a fiddle using apathy, sympathy, depression, guilt, etc. etc.

The church I used to belong to did an experiment. Me and a few others got together, pulled some money and offered kids $10 for A's, $5 for B's, $0 for C's, -$10 for D's and -$20 for F's. We also offered a $100 bonus for straight A's and a $50 bonus for A/B honor roll.

The improvement in grades was IMMEDIATE.

We did this for about 20 failing students. All of the students managed to pull their grades up such that they made money (notice how the payment was weighted against low grades) and about half of the students managed to get on A/B honor roll by end of the semester with a couple making all A's.

The big thing though was not just the incentive but SHOWING the kids how to study, keep notebooks, time management, and organization.

The problem with most parents is they take those things for granted and tell their kids "Go study".

But study how? Organize how? Once we showed the kids HOW and then dangled the carrot in front of them, they were off to the races.

Mel...

I'm bothered at the idea that money motivates kids to learn. For underprivileged kids that makes a kind of sense, but for kids who already have security of home and food, money is a want, but education is a need. If we're confusing needs with wants in our child-raising then either as adults we've gotten badly confused ourselves, or we don't have the courage of our convictions.

Yes, education is important and most kids know that,

but they only know it in an 'abstract' sense. Money, however, is something they know in a very 'tangible' and 'immediate' sense.

So I don't think using money as an incentive means you are a horrible parent or your kids have no morales (not saying you are saying that). It is just a tool to encourage the positive behavior of getting good grades.

Mel...

If we're going to pay them to work, we'd better be teaching them financial responsibility too. Are they adding budgeting and investing to the curriculum?

If we're going to encourage them to be money grubbing capitalists, we should at least teach them how to be good ones.

Horrible idea to pay them for just showing up. "Congratulations, you're such a special little snowflake you get paid just for existing."

I like Dgi's sliding scale. You get lousy grades, you'll pay for it, literally. At the same time this shouldn't be done through the government, and definitely not with tax dollars. If kids want to fail at life and make absolutely nothing out of their lives, that is their perogative, I don't see why society should have to baby step them into adulthood. Learning consequences is a good thing. With all this hand holding how are they ever going to learn?

We used a system like this when I taught in upward bound, where the kids would get a stipend based on their grades.

It wasn't much, but it was something like 10 bucks or so (it worked out to 50 dollars for the entire 2 month summer program, but it also ran throughout the entire school year), that was given out biweekly. Depending on your grades you'd either get the money, or it would be withheld. If your grades went up to where you qualified for it(e.g. your GPA was up to a 2.5 or better), you got the money, however you had to keep your grade up for 3 consecutive periods to get past stipends that you didn't qualify for.

There were specific activities you had to participate in (e.g. attending after school study programs, etc.), and overall it worked very well. The thing to remember though, was that most of the kids in the Upward Bound program I worked in, were in poverty. The money that they got from their stipends, might be the only way they could afford to go to a movie, or do other fun things.

I believe that if a kid kept their grades up, and didn't miss more than a few of the required events, then they could get something like 200 dollars for the entire year. The results we saw definitely made it money well spent.

jennontheisland said:

If we're going to pay them to work, we'd better be teaching them financial responsibility too. Are they adding budgeting and investing to the curriculum?

If we're going to encourage them to be money grubbing capitalists, we should at least teach them how to be good ones.

Click to expand...

Amen. I got a little something for good grades from day one. Nothing for C or below, but a little for a B, and a little more for an A.

I learned that if I put half in my account and spent half on candy, I ended up with less candy today, but neat toys tomorrow.

Too bad most kids never got the message. If they had, the average consumer would have never fallen for credit cards, interest-only home loans or ARMs. The economy would be in much better shape.

When I was growing up, the sliding scale worked liked this

A's = $5
B's = $2
Honor roll = $20 bonus
C's = nothing
D's = don't ask for shit (going to the movies, etc) cuz you ain't getting shit
F's = ass whoopin followed by parent teacher conference followed by another ass whoopin after the conference depending on how much of a little shit i was being in class.

Needless to say, I was an honor roll student until the 6th grade where I got my first F. Then two ass whoopins later I was an honor roll student again until I graduated college

Mel...

Won't work.

These guys don't know children.

dgiharris said:

I don't think using money as an incentive means you are a horrible parent or your kids have no morales (not saying you are saying that).

Click to expand...

Okay, I will say that, just to take a devil's advocate position. It's a bit stronger than I really think, but let's try it out and see...

Here's my counter-position:
And here's my counter-proposition:

It is absolutely appropriate ESSENTIAL that children see a connection between their investment and the growing value of their knowledge.

Click to expand...

Fixed that for you.

Information. It is at their fingertips and they have been raised by the "Short Attention Span Theater" world of today's media. They are the "Why" generation empowered. We have to deliver the "why", and help them understand "why it has value" on the front end.

I bribed my kid with M&Ms to use the potty.

Any parent who claims they've never bribed a kid is lying. Because it works. And anyone who wants ice cream needs to eat their peas first.

School, he's motivated (he's 7 and already talking about grad school), but I can totally see how some parents could need a bit of help in encouraging kids. Especially early teens who already know everything they'll ever need to know and totally don't need your advice.

I think that what we do with toddlers is a very different proposition to what we do with kids in middle and late childhood and beyond. As children age and mature, the range of options increases, as does their sophistication in playing games with the options they're given.

I'd also suggest that setting conditions for something kids were going to get anyway is very different to providing extraordinary gifts for ordinary activity. One teaches responsibility; the other teaches that the world can be played for self-interest.

In an overprivileged, transactional world, exploitation and wheedling are commonplace and kids choke on material rewards, luxuries and comforts to the point of meaninglessness. The thing I think they miss most is to know that they are seen, understood and matter individually. I believe that this is priceless, and very few people in a child's life are able to offer it. I don't believe that cash or M&Ms are anything like as valuable as to be understood, grow dignity, confidence and self-respect.

Here's the real challenge though, I think: adults themselves aren't seen enough, acknowledged enough or told that they matter enough. Because they aren't, I think that they may not realise just what it is they most need to pass on to their children, or in many cases, how best to do it.