A Lecture Hall Is Filled At The Brim With College Students

In my own experiences, my grandparents would pay me with the amount of money depending upon the grades I got. Roland Fryer Jr experimented with inner-city schools using cash incentives to help motivate the students. Fryer used the largest school districts in the United States to test his idea. The results vary from increasing the attendance and some reading scores, but overall this experiment did not improve their academic performance by much (Sandel 51-53). Jackson looked further than improved AP outcomes because they may not reflect increased learning. Instead he looked at the immediate effects of a broader set of outcomes such as the ACT and SAT. The donors for this program determine the subject in which the rewards are offered and the financial rewards given (Jackson). Attempts made to pay kids to do better in school work with operant conditioning by B.F. Skinner to alter the behavior of the children and teachers. The positive reinforcement of the monetary incentive entices students and teachers to develop more scholarly accomplishments. AP classes at my school do not offer cash incentives but I believe the

Margaret Heffernan once said, “For good ideas and true innovation, you need a mix of human interaction, conflict, argument, and debate.” In the article it is debated if there is any benefit in monetary rewards for students. Teachers, and parents alike are always trying to find the best way to reward and inspire there students to do well in school. Matthew G Springer is a professor of Public Policy and Education at Vanderbilt University. He is also the director of the National Center on Performance Incentives. He wrote this article to display his research and studies.

“An incentive is a bullet, a key: an often tiny object with astonishing power to change anything”(Levitt 20). What professor Steven D. Levitt (a professor of economics at the University of Chicago’s dictum here is that the incentive has a lot of power in this world). And that the metaphor of comparing “incentives”to a bullet really speaks wonders to their strengths. They can change almost any situation by motivating someone to do something in a business situation, all the way to education fields. After many years of college, business and economics students are being taught how to be greedy in college. It is only a matter of time before greed is too powerful. Incentives and greed both have favorable and critical effects on individuals and the populace, but when connected together both can have dangerous effects on future selections.

Lastly, they explain the fundamental ideas of the book. Incentives are “means of urging people to do more of a good thing and less of a bad thing.”; according to the authors, they “are the cornerstone of modern life”. Levitt and Dubner also focus the book on the following concepts:

In this article the author, Eric Priceman, argues that rewarding accomplishments is part of the education processes it only creates a problem when we let it. I feel as though his argument is in fact persuasive and reaches his intended neutral audience. Priceman starts by giving directions in differentiating the terms award and reward. These words are commonly used synonymously and Eric makes an underlying statement that if one is to make this argument, for or against, they must first define these two words. In addition to his initial definition Priceman establishes ethos when he brings up the fact that he has 3 adult children. His credibility is shown because his kids are no longer growing up, they have grown up and he has went through these

Following the introduction of the whole school behaviour policy, it was also made compulsory for schools to include a system of rewards and sanctions (Elton, 1989, Steer, 2005; DFE, 2014; Payne, 2015). Within school X it was found that this system was based on the behaviourist principles of Skinners (1974) theory. The use of rewards and sanctions in school X consisted of positively reinforcing desirable behaviours and correcting negative behaviour through sanctions. The behavioural theory underlines that by reinforcing a particular behaviour, children will repeat it as they begin to associate rewards with a particular behaviour (Skinner, 1974; Morgan, 2009; Rogers, 2011a). For example it was observed that when a child was positively praised for helping others, the teacher would reward the child by awarding a dojo. A dojo is used as a form of praise which amounts to a score at the end of the week based on how many dojos a child receives. This will then feed on to the merit card and sticker system enabling children to be rewarded by prizes. Consequently children were able to make associations between the desired behaviour and its outcome. This is therefore identified as a form of extrinsic motivation (Roffey and O’ Reirdan, 2001; Payne, 2015).

Stephen J. Dubner and Steven Levitt in a passage from the book, Freakonomics, published in 2005, addresses the topic of incentives, and that people will do anything they possibly can to get what they desire. The authors support their claim through the use of diction, first by enumeratio, where the authors include details of a real life incident to influence the reader that their opinion is true; secondly by hyperbole, where the authors exaggerate a point to make their views more agreeable; and thirdly by epizeuxis, where the authors repeat the word ‘incentive’ to emphasize their point. The authors’ overall purpose is to influence the reader that people will do whatever they can to get what they want. Stephen J. Dubner and Steven Levitt create

Pink provides a well laid out case highlighting the gap between what science knows and what organizations do. Showcasing the mid-century work of Harry Harlow and Edward Deci , Pink explains how human motivation seems to run counter to what most scientists and citizens believe. For decades, we have believed that we know what motivates people: rewards. Rewards are supposed to intensify interest and enhance performance. But Harlow and Deci found different results. Deci wrote, “When money is used as an external reward for some activity, the subjects lose intrinsic interest for the activity.” Like a shot of espresso, rewards can give you a jolt of energy, but the boost wears out, moreover, it can erode a person’s longer-term motivation to engage in the task. As we continue to incentivize our staff and students,

In Hallie’s Ted Talk Dan Phink gave me a new insight into how motivation can shape ones production. He argued that the conventional ideas of incentives were wrong. I agreed with his reasoning that in some circumstances incentives such as “Do this in five minutes!” is detrimental to one’s thinking capabilities. In elementary school my school had us learn addition and subtraction via timed quizzes called Speed Drills. The method was effective at drilling the process of doing math, but when it came to fixing puzzles many in my class struggled. I do not like time limits on assignments or activities. They do not motivate me to finish faster as depending on the activity I AM A SLOW WORKER. I fully agree with the notion that the reward punishment

In the book Freakonomics, Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner note “An incentive is a bullet, a lever, a key: an often-tiny object with astonishing power to change a situation” (16). This is to showcase the amount of power an incentive can have over a person or a situation; either good or bad. Humans are found to use incentives when it comes to making daily decisions. Often, people need motives to proceed with their plans. Some tend to make either moral, social, or economic incentive. The moral incentive is about self-respect; keeping in check with what was taught to believe is right and wrong. The social incentive is how the public views the person; wanting to look good in front others. Economic incentive, however, would relate to monetary benefit. While all three incentives can affect people’s decisions, economic

This type of motivation is influenced heavily by rewards and external incentives. It also implies the notion that “I have to do something” in order to be compliant with what someone else wants me to do. It is a motivation that is primarily influenced by the hope of attaining tangible items such as prizes, special privileges, or money. Although Drive implies the heavy use of Motivation 2.0 by the corporate world, Pink also draws attention to the fact that schools typically operate under this mode, as well, and that it can have detrimental effects on our students and on learning, in general. Motivation 2.0 is also referred to in the book as the “Carrots and Sticks Approach”, and although it may yield positive results in the short-term, the repeated or incorrect use of extrinsic rewards can actually work against what educators are trying to achieve in terms of truly motivating their students.

As I read the article from the New York Times Newspaper titled, “Should you bribe your kids?” I immediately though about myself and my brother when we were kids, and how our parents would literally use the method of bribing or “rewarding” to “motivate” their lazy children at that time. Looking at what a Harvard economist, Roland Fryer Jr. have studied is quite shocking and unusual to me. I honestly wouldn’t be able to let my children go to school and study well only if they would get paid for it. I believe this is a bit extreme “motivation” to study.

A reward is a high extrinsic motivator. The reward can be monetary, gift certificate, day off with pay, a two hour lunch, or working for two hours on anything but work. All entice performance and competition in the workplace. A gold star, being the teacher’s helper for a day, no daily

Many students are driven by grades for higher education and future jobs. When rewards such as candy and toys are used to gain student motivation it can be considered bribery.

money’ and ‘one action gives rise to another’. That means if people are rewarded they will be motivated