No

by Raven Lebeau

Created on: January 13, 2008

Providing immediate and tangible rewards for academic achievement only fuels the need for instantaneous gratification that adults are so fond of condemning in young people. A developed intellect and wide knowledge base will have fiscal rewards that amount to far more than pocket change. By dangling the cheap and flashy incentive of immediate cash, we blind students to the greater prize awaiting the true scholar.

Students need to learn that education is a long-term investment. If they view learning as a means to quick cash, they will study with only "the test" in mind and not take the time to make connections between subjects or retain information after the final. Worse, they will quickly become unmotivated when colleges or trade schools provide no such instantaneous rewards.

Because I was not a reward-driven student, but rather a knowledge-hungry scholar, I recall a fascinating article from the introductory psychology course I took as a sixteen your old college freshmen (over twelve years ago). In the study, the researchers had their volunteer subjects perform some exceedingly dull and pointless physical task. I believe it had something to do with putting pegs in holes, and would be insufficient to amuse anyone over the age of five. One group of volunteers got paid for their efforts, while a second group got only a "thanks" at the end. Both groups filled out a survey regarding their enjoyment of the task.

Now, to be perfectly honest, my powers of reasoning would lead me to believe that those who were paid enjoyed the task more. However, I will humbly admit to being entirely wrong. In fact, the paid volunteers found the task unpleasant and tedious, while the unpaid subjects found it somewhat enjoyable and relaxing. As the professor gave this lecture, my mind wandered back in time to revisit a junior high school English class where we read of the irascible Tom Sawyer conning his friends into painting the fence. By making them think that painting the fence was fun (rather than attempting to bribe them), he had his playmates all offering him their toys and treasures in exchange for a turn at painting. Both the psychology study and the down to earth wisdom of Mark Twain affirm that humans are more motivated by pleasure than by money. What's more, when one is being paid to do a task, it automatically becomes distasteful.

When there is money at stake, any activity can become stressful. Writing an article for a Helium contest becomes an exercise in frustration rather than a means of sharing knowledge. After all, every misplaced comma, every unnecessary adjective, every over-controversial tenet, could mean a financial "loss". A poorly rated article can be shrugged off as a "matter of taste", but that won't change the fact that there will be no large adjustments headed for my Pay Pal account. When revising an article for a contest, I do so not out of a genuine belief that I can improve my work but out of a grudging concession to popular opinion. There is no joy or satisfaction in such experiences. (None of that is a criticism of Helium, since contests are, of course, optional. Also, Helium is a business and should act accordingly. Schools should have a different set of goals.)

If students have money directly associated with grades they will become even more bitter and demanding when dealing with teachers. A poor grade will not be taken as a helpful critique but as a literal robbery. Students put enough emphasis on grades as it is! If a grade means the difference between having that new mp3 player and making do with the old CD player, students will view their teachers as hated adversaries rather than sources of knowledge.

Some students are not able to set aside their immediate needs in favor of the future, and they are not able to enjoy learning for its own sake. They do not suffer from a lack of character, merely a worldview shaped by current financial needs. When their families are living paycheck to paycheck, always too overwhelmed with today to consider tomorrow, they cannot be faulted for failing to understand the value of education. When we reinforce this way of thinking by providing cash for grades, we do them no favors.

For students who want immediate income, there should be technical programs that can be completed instead of, rather than after, high school. When I taught at a community college, I had innumerable bright people in my technical mathematics classes. Most of them told stories of hating school, but showed enthusiasm for their technical work and even appreciated learning math, since the were doing so in an applied context. Many of those students had dealt with personal and financial difficulties before deciding on a technical program. Had they been able to pursue a technical certificate at a young age, I have no doubt that they would have been successful from the start.

Not all students can succeed in the same way. There is no incentive program or educational technique that will make all students into the traditional "liberal arts" scholars teachers want them to be. Only by recognizing the real and meaningful differences between students and providing for them appropriately can we give all students an equal opportunity at success. Fairness is not a process of giving each student the same thing, but a matter of giving each student what he or she deserves.

Learn more about this author, Raven Lebeau.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.