The first time I saw Roland Fryer, a Harvard economist discuss cash based incentives for a group of African American students from poverty, I was appalled. I sat on my high horse in judgement over paying kids to care about learning. Why the desire to learn should be intrinsic, for after all, "Knowledge is power" and everyone wants to be powerful, right?
I was reminded in a conversation with an analytical that the world is built on incentives. I grew up with an allowance--so did my children and friends--not necessarily for getting good grades, but for being well behaved and completing chores and other responsibilities. So what's the difference? There probably isn't one.
But in my world and the world of my professional peers, we love learning, exploring new ideas, reading that latest book or article to expand our thinking. We can't wait to have time for those conversations where we agree and disagree and finally exhausted start searching for the next mind bender and extender. Never content to remain the same. Working among people who love to learn makes incentives for learning seem contrived and almost sacrilegious. Yet if we are a society of incentives, bonuses, and merit pay why shouldn't it extend to the kids.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well, I see this program as another possible solution to the many problems that urban school districts face.
ReplyDeleteBut wouldn't it be easier if the American Educational System served all students fairly and committed to making sure that School A is just as effective ( in student acheivement)as school B.
i guess i'm sitting firmly beside the high horse version. merit pay is devisive, it puts the emphasis in the wrong places. i think we need to work on intrinsic motivation and not fuel the extrinsic motivation of payments.
ReplyDeletei don't believe it's an issue of serving students fairly, it's deciding HOW to serve students. i agree equity would be ideal, but when it comes to paying for grades i think it is more of a philosophical decision that needs to be made. i don't want to see us, as educators, go down that road.
They desperately want our kids to perform better and this truly is a noble goal. But in motivating students to improve their learning and performance why not use evidence-based practices instead, like allocating the money to better teacher training, smaller class size, or increasing the budget for technology. Why are they experimenting with a system of questionable effectiveness? I just think it’s wrong to use money as a bait to lure kids into learning.
ReplyDeletejanice - i agree, i think it cheapens the struggle educators go through to help their students succeed.
ReplyDelete