Arianna Prothero's Does Paying Kids To Do Well-Actually Work

If students are rewarded for quality schoolwork, grades may initially improve. They may show more excitement. However, in the article “Why You Shouldn’t Pay Children for Grades” by Amy Mccready, it is found that the enhanced grades deteriorate along with the excitement for the payment. Most children simply lose interest in the reward. It is better to just let youth accomplish

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.

In my view, the incentive route is not the most beneficial. You have to take in the fact that the money to buy these incentives, comes from the students’ parents through taxes. If the parent really wanted to give their children incentives, then that is their decision to make. More specifically, I believe that a child does not need incentives. The child should want to go to college for their education to get a career. They shouldn’t have to be poked a prodded to go to school. Getting an education to do a job they really want should be an incentive, not a “drag”. For example, the thought of taxes, an adult does not want to pay these taxes for someone’s children. The only reason they would be

The general argument made by the author Arianna Prothero in her work ‘Does Paying Kids to Do Well in School Actually Work’ is that paying students for grades only works for students who are already doing well within their classes. Throughout the article, the author was appearing to be neutral about the topic. Prothero uses the statement “the effects are small if even there at all” to emphasize the point about the incentive only working for students who are almost there. These pupils are the students who only need to put in a small amount of work and effort to achieve this reward.

Giving your children money for satisfying grades that they get doesn't benefit them with their career that they will have as adults. Let me back this up. If they get paid for the super grades that they received they will soon have an expectation that everything good that they do they should receive something in return. This makes kids not try to the best of their ability because these children know

The general argument made by Arianna Prothero in her passage, Does Paying Kids to Do Well in School Actually Work, is that incentives, such as paying students to go to school, will improve the way they learn. More specifically, she believes that financial incentives affect students rather than little trinkets or toys. She writes “Incentives are also more likely to work for students who need a little improvement to earn a passing grade.” In this passage, Arianna is suggesting that more schools in the U.S. should start providing incentives but that are designed well or else they will not work. So, does paying kids to do well in school actually work?

Would students be able to improve their grades if they were getting paid? Money is a great reward for most students and it could possibly have a long term effect on students. They are always wanting their grades to be improved and then they would have more of a reason to study for test and quizzes if they were getting paid do go to school. Students would be focused at school if their was money to be made by going to school. Teachers would also not be stopping as often because of students getting of track. I believe students would improve their grades if they were getting paid because, Money could have a long term effect, and more student could need a little more motivation

One time, I got a good grade and my grandma gave me money. If school is truly wants student to be motivated to do well in the school should pay student for a better grade. Motivate student prepares them for high school higher test score. From better graduation rates for learning about work making kids smarter there are many positive effects of paying student for a higher grade.

“Mom, if you want me to go to school, give me five dollars.” This is an example of what might happen if you pay your kids for great grades. If schools truly wanted kids to succeed, they would teach them better, do new lessons, and not pay students for anything they’re supposed to be doing all ready. Paying children for favorable grades robs their feeling of accomplishment. In addition, they don’t take in what they’ve been taught in class. Also, money doesn’t really help the kids in the long run, if you’re not teaching them about it. Paying students for superb grades is a poor idea, as a result they only do their work for the money, and they want the money so badly, they lose the love.

Motivating students with money has reached Washington DC area from their effort. The author thinks maybe it's not so bad getting paid for good grades. He thinks it doesn't hurt to try new things. He stated about his daughter getting paid for good grades and she started doing better. But , that's not the only thing they want to do with the money of portraying students to do better. They also want to use it to train teachers and give students more time to learn. I intend to also use this source to help formulate my arguments about if students should be paid for good

Research has shown that the money incentive works best for Hispanics and students who have behavioral issues. According to a Harvard study, in the school year of 2008-09 the academic gains of Hispanics and other subgroups on the DC-CAS standardized tests were equivalent to an additional five months of schooling. These improvements were attributed to money incentives that the school offered (Turque). This evidence shows that in Washington D.C hispanics increased their standardized test scores to a proportion that is equal to another full academic year of learning all because of cash incentives. Additionally, the article states, “the group that achieved the biggest test score gains was students who had been suspended the previous school year (2007-08) for disciplinary reasons” (Turque). Essentially, this quote means that the cash incentive was most effective for students who were generally troublemakers in the past (this includes the Hispanics). Although there are bright spots to this experiment as shown in the evidence, there are not enough mutual gains from other kids around the country to continue this method. Plus, just because Hispanics and troubled kids had the largest increase in scores, does not necessarily mean that they had the best scores; they could have gone from a failing grade to a

Kids should get paid for good grades because they will start reading more, in a school in Dallas, TX. They start to pay two dollars for each book kids read, they actually became better readers, they started to understand things better, the test scores begin to get highly raised up. The other people that are in the opposite side may say that, this is bad for young people and they will became interested and will just want to do the things just if there's money involved and they will, not do it if they don't get payed for what they do, and if they don't get payed or if they get late payed they will go down, but they are all wrong because probably, with all the things that they learn will keep going up. Don't you guys want your kids to subside in school?

In my way of thinking paying children for good marks is useful because not only it makes them to study harder and make their own future but also helps them to see how much they need to work for money when they grow up

Underperforming schools are a mess. The students don’t behave, get bad grades and bring down the school’s reputation. Schools like these are most likely to have not as many students succeed in graduating. They are the schools that have the run down playgrounds, old textbooks, and no technology. The Cash for Grades program is supposed to be a program that can end all of this. This program basically speaks for itself, it gives students the opportunity to earn money be getting good grades. Paying students to get good grades is a horrible idea. This is a bad idea because an enlargement in cheating would take place in schools, kids would start only doing things for money, and it is a waste of our tax payer’s money.

What would happen if students are paid? If schools truly want students to learn they shouldn’t pay students for good grades. Paying students for their grades can lead to lower academic performances. In addition, the students who are getting payed will dampen their natural enthusiasm for learning. It also gives kids unneeded pressure extra pressure. Paying students for good grade is a bad idea because they will have lower academic performances, their enthusiasm will dampen and students will have unneeded extra pressure.