High Tech Elementary Explorer Social Curriculum
Explorer believes in teaching a social curriculum that helps build the classrooms and our school into a learning community where high social and academic goals are both attained. The focus of the social curriculum is on establishing productive social and working relationships with others. The implementation of the social curriculum helps children develop social skills such as responsibility, empathy and cooperation. It also encourages children:
The social curriculum is not taught as a separate entity, but is a part of everything the child does within the school setting. It is included in playground activities, gatherings and exploratory classes (Art, Active Education, Science, and Music)
Social emotional learning is teaching a way of being. It involves how you see others, and how you communicate and relate to other people. In social emotional learning, we teach students to recognize feelings, to empathize, to care about others. We teach students to assume the best intentions, and we do the same as teachers. We teach students to look at different perspectives, to value other opinions and ideas, and to express their own opinions and ideas in clear ways. We teach students how to work with others, how to share materials and space, and how to solve problems that arise. We teach students how to show their very best selves and to take pride in the work they are doing. We teach them to do the right thing because it helps them or helps the community. When we leave the classroom, the way we interact with the world is still closely related to the way we practice SEL in the classroom. It's the way we hope all human beings think about and interact with each other and the world.
Project Based Learning provides the context in which this learning can occur. It places students in learning environments that are student centered and collaborative. It is assumed in projects that students will try their best because they care about the work and they care about the community that is directly affected by the work (whether that is their audience or the group members they are collaborating with). If a student does not do his/her share of the work, they learn what this means for the rest of the group. They discuss and communicate openly. PBL provides opportunities for students to share opinions, to disagree, to share materials, and to problem solve when conflicts arise. PBL topics can be directly related to social emotional learning, particularly when we are trying to make positive changes in people's lives through a project (ex. valuing immigrant contributions, finding solutions for climate change or agricultural sustainability, empowering our community to be healthier). Basically, without PBL, we would be missing the context in which social emotional learning opportunities authentically arise.
So the two go hand in hand. Without SEL, PBL would not be successful, and without PBL, there would be limited opportunities to teach SEL in authentic context.
Explorer’s social curriculum has been successfully implemented over the past 15+ years. It has integrated learning, teaching and caring into the daily school program. A high priority is placed on the development of each child’s personal growth, sense of respect for self and others and social responsibility to prepare them for continued success in future academic and social endeavors.
The implementation of the social curriculum requires a commitment of time. It takes time to develop within children life-long characteristics of responsibility, self-discipline and cooperation. It takes time when children are allowed to be a part of the decision making process and to be problem solvers. It takes time to be consistent in following through on consequences for inappropriate behaviors. It takes time to help children establish caring behaviors so that they can become contributing members of society. It is a priority at Explorer to spend time helping children develop positive social skills.
The School Community
The school community includes the faculty, the children, the parents, the staff, and the administrators. The way in which all of these groups interact with each other has an effect upon the child, so we all strive to communicate openly and directly with one another. For a school to be true to the values of the social curriculum, support from each group is necessary.
The Teacher
The teachers are the primary source for implementing the social curriculum at school. They are the ones who have daily contact with the children over an extended period of time. They model ethical behavior and nurture the child’s character in the school setting. The teacher creates a class community where the children come to know that the group is valued, the individual is respected, and each one has a responsibility within the class. The teacher:
The Parent
Since the adults are the models in our community, it is important that the actions of the adults are consistent with the values of the social emotional curriculum. To bridge the home-school connection, we highly encourage attendance at Parent Education, where social emotional concepts will be taught.
Helpful Resources
The Risks of RewardsBy Alfie Kohn
Many educators are acutely aware that punishment and threats are counterproductive. Making children suffer in order to alter their future behavior can often elicit temporary compliance, but this strategy is unlikely to help children become ethical, compassionate decision makers. Punishment, even if referred to euphemistically as “consequences,” tends to generate anger, defiance, and a desire for revenge. Moreover, it models the use of power rather than reason and ruptures the important relationship between adult and child.
Of those teachers and parents who make a point of not punishing children, a significant proportion turn instead to the use of rewards. The ways in which rewards are used, as well as the values that are considered important, differ among (and within) cultures. This digest, however, deals with typical practices in classrooms in the United States, where stickers and stars, A’s and praise, awards and privileges, are routinely used to induce children to learn or comply with an adult’s demands (Fantuzzo et al., 1991). As with punishments, the offer of rewards can elicit temporary compliance in many cases. Unfortunately, carrots turn out to be no more effective than sticks at helping children to become caring, responsible people or lifelong, self-directed learners.
REWARDS VS. GOOD VALUES
Studies over many years have found that behavior modification programs are rarely successful at producing lasting changes in attitudes or even behavior. When the rewards stop, people usually return to the way they acted before the program began. More disturbingly, researchers have recently discovered that children whose parents make frequent use of rewards tend to be less generous than their peers (Fabes et al., 1989; Grusec, 1991; Kohn 1990).
Indeed, extrinsic motivators do not alter the emotional or cognitive commitments that underlie behavior–at least not in a desirable direction. A child promised a treat for learning or acting responsibly has been given every reason to stop doing so when there is no longer a reward to be gained.
Research and logic suggest that punishment and rewards are not really opposites, but two sides of the same coin. Both strategies amount to ways of trying to manipulate someone’s behavior–in one case, prompting the question, “What do they want me to do, and what happens to me if I don’t do it?”, and in the other instance, leading a child to ask, “What do they want me to do, and what do I get for doing it?” Neither strategy helps children to grapple with the question, “What kind of person do I want to be?”
REWARDS VS. ACHIEVEMENT
Rewards are no more helpful at enhancing achievement than they are at fostering good values. At least two dozen studies have shown that people expecting to receive a reward for completing a task (or for doing it successfully) simply do not perform as well as those who expect nothing (Kohn, 1993). This effect is robust for young children, older children, and adults; for males and females; for rewards of all kinds; and for tasks ranging from memorizing facts to designing collages to solving problems. In general, the more cognitive sophistication and open-ended thinking that is required for a task, the worse people tend to do when they have been led to perform that task for a reward.
There are several plausible explanations for this puzzling but remarkably consistent finding. The most compelling of these is that rewards cause people to lose interest in whatever they were rewarded for doing. This phenomenon, which has been demonstrated in scores of studies (Kohn, 1993), makes sense given that “motivation” is not a single characteristic that an individual possesses to a greater or lesser degree. Rather, intrinsic motivation (an interest in the task for its own sake) is qualitatively different from extrinsic motivation (in which completion of the task is seen chiefly as a prerequisite for obtaining something else) (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Therefore, the question educators need to ask is not how motivated their students are, but how their students are motivated.
In one representative study, young children were introduced to an unfamiliar beverage called kefir. Some were just asked to drink it; others were praised lavishly for doing so; a third group was promised treats if they drank enough. Those children who received either verbal or tangible rewards consumed more of the beverage than other children, as one might predict. But a week later these children found it significantly less appealing than they did before, whereas children who were offered no rewards liked it just as much as, if not more than, they had earlier (Birch et al., 1984). If we substitute reading or doing math or acting generously for drinking kefir, we begin to glimpse the destructive power of rewards. The data suggest that the more we want children to want to do something, the more counterproductive it will be to reward them for doing it.
Deci and Ryan (1985) describe the use of rewards as “control through seduction.” Control, whether by threats or bribes, amounts to doing things to children rather than working with them. This ultimately frays relationships, both among students (leading to reduced interest in working with peers) and between students and adults (insofar as asking for help may reduce the probability of receiving a reward).
Moreover, students who are encouraged to think about grades, stickers, or other “goodies” become less inclined to explore ideas, think creatively, and take chances. At least ten studies have shown that people offered a reward generally choose the easiest possible task (Kohn, 1993). In the absence of rewards, by contrast, children are inclined to pick tasks that are just beyond their current level of ability.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE FAILURE OF REWARDS
The implications of this analysis and these data are troubling. If the question is “Do rewards motivate students?”, the answer is, “Absolutely: they motivate students to get rewards.” Unfortunately, that sort of motivation often comes at the expense of interest in, and excellence at, whatever they are doing. What is required, then, is nothing short of a transformation of our schools.
First, classroom management programs that rely on rewards and consequences ought to be avoided by any educator who wants students to take responsibility for their own (and others’) behavior–and by any educator who places internalization of positive values ahead of mindless obedience. The alternative to bribes and threats is to work toward creating a caring community whose members solve problems collaboratively and decide together how they want their classroom to be (DeVries & Zan, 1994; Solomon et al., 1992).
Second, grades in particular have been found to have a detrimental effect on creative thinking, long-term retention, interest in learning, and preference for challenging tasks (Butler & Nisan, 1986; Grolnick & Ryan, 1987). These detrimental effects are not the result of too many bad grades, too many good grades, or the wrong formula for calculating grades. Rather, they result from the practice of grading itself, and the extrinsic orientation it promotes. Parental use of rewards or consequences to induce children to do well in school has a similarly negative effect on enjoyment of learning and, ultimately, on achievement (Gottfried et al., 1994). Avoiding these effects requires assessment practices geared toward helping students experience success and failure not as reward and punishment, but as information.
Finally, this distinction between reward and information might be applied to positive feedback as well. While it can be useful to hear about one’s successes, and highly desirable to receive support and encouragement from adults, most praise is tantamount to verbal reward. Rather than helping children to develop their own criteria for successful learning or desirable behavior, praise can create a growing dependence on securing someone else’s approval. Rather than offering unconditional support, praise makes a positive response conditional on doing what the adult demands. Rather than heightening interest in a task, the learning is devalued insofar as it comes to be seen as a prerequisite for receiving the teacher’s approval (Kohn, 1993).
CONCLUSION
In short, good values have to be grown from the inside out. Attempts to short-circuit this process by dangling rewards in front of children are at best ineffective, and at worst counterproductive. Children are likely to become enthusiastic, lifelong learners as a result of being provided with an engaging curriculum; a safe, caring community in which to discover and create; and a significant degree of choice about what (and how and why) they are learning. Rewards–like punishments–are unnecessary when these things are present, and are ultimately destructive in any case.
Copyright © 1994 by Alfie Kohn. This article may be downloaded, reproduced, and distributed without permission as long as each copy includes this notice along with citation information (i.e., name of the periodical in which it originally appeared, date of publication, and author’s name). Permission must be obtained in order to reprint this article in a published work or in order to offer it for sale in any form. Please write to the address indicated on the Contact Us page.
Intrinsic Motivation vs. Extrinsic Motivation
We assume that all students want to do what’s best for their community and for themselves. We want students to do the right thing, even when no one is looking. For this reason, we do not use extrinsic motivators such as rewards or punishments to influence children’s behavior. This means no table points, smiley faces, stickers, sticker charts, names on the board, detention, etc.
Instead, we spend a lot of time building community, and discussing reasons why we do things. We teach students to think about what people are feeling when they are around them. For example, we ask students to walk in the hallway so that everyone is safe, not so they don’t get in trouble. We ask students to keep voices at a zero in the hallway so that other classes can learn without distractions. Much of the thinking is centered around the big idea that our actions affect others (empathy).
Even small things, like putting supplies away, are framed in the context of the whole community. For example, when crayons are left out of the box and just placed in the basket, a student might give a message to the whole class. “When I was trying to get crayons, it was hard because someone had just thrown a bunch of crayons in the bin without putting them back in the box. If you’re doing that, please stop. It makes it hard for whoever has to clean up your mess.”
In the same way, when some students struggle with empathy or social awareness, we talk about how our actions make people have thoughts about us. For example, when a student who had troubled with empathy pulled a chair out from behind another student on purpose, we had a private conversation. “When you pull out his chair on purpose, people think things about you. What do you think they might think? If they have these thoughts about you, how might they act toward you? Is that what you want?” We discuss expected and unexpected behaviors, and push students to become social detectives, attuned to social situations and social cues.
Our expectations for doing beautiful and rigorous work are also a part of the culture. Students understand that they do not work toward a grade, but rather toward expectations to do their best work. When students are having trouble completing work on time, this discussion is private. This can be done using progress reports, or one on one conversations, as well as emails and parent communication. We work to preserve the dignity of students, and so we take care to think about classroom management that might shame them. At the same time, we make sure to make clear the importance of completing work and of being prepared. Project work does not work when some people do not do their part, and we encourage groups to talk to individuals in the group who have dropped the ball and not done their part.
Logical Consequences
While we do not use extrinsic motivators such as fear of punishment or rewards, logical consequences must be consistent. A logical consequence is related to the behavior. For example, if a student had ample time to complete work in class, but was too distracted, he or she might have to take it home to complete. Another example is if a student is having trouble taking turns speaking at the rug and is interrupting others, they may have to sit elsewhere after a few reminders. In the hallway, this might mean having to go back and practice walking quietly if a class is having a hard time doing so. It is helpful to have a debriefing conversation after a student has experienced a logical consequence to process what the problem was and how they could improve in the future.
Mistakes
Our school values mistakes as opportunities for learning. When students make academic errors, these are seen as valuable mistakes. When students exhibit unexpected behavior, these are seen as valuable mistakes. We separate the behavior from the identity of the child, preserving their identity as a good person who wants to do their best for themselves and their community. We do, however, address the problem and the mistake. This is essential, as we don’t want students to see themselves as bad or good, smart or dumb. Growth mindset plays an important role in both academic and social situations.
Mindset
Here’s a quick introduction on mindset and how it alters motivation. The staff at Explorer had a professional development dedicated around Carol Dweck’s book, Mindset, the New Psychology of Success.
The following excerpt is from The Power of Our Words by Paula Denton. It is a great example of how a child’s motivation and self-identity can be narrowed to a ‘fixed’ mindset by just one sentence.
(Adapted from The Power of Our Words by Paula Denton)
When Don was five, his mother, who loved to sing, enrolled him in a children’s choir. “I had a very deep, booming voice for a little boy and, I suppose, a tin ear as well,” Don recalled. “But I loved going to choir practice and singing with the other kids. I liked to stand in the front row and sing my heart out!” One day, as the group was preparing to perform, the music teacher said to Don, “Let’s have you move to the back row and try just mouthing the words.” “That was the moment that I learned that I was not a singer,” Don said, chuckling. “I never wanted to go back to choir practice again.”
…The teacher’s belief that Don was not a singer, and never would be, came through to him loud and clear, even at the young age of five. The fact that Don, now forty eight, still remembers and still tells this story shows that her words had a deep impact on his developing sense of self. The words narrowed his sense of possible identities rather than broadening them. Rather than helping Don learn how to sing better, this teacher effectively stopped Don’s motivation to sing.
What we say matters. In fact, it matters a lot. There is a good deal of research being conducted on the role of language and its effects on the brain and learning. Attribution theory is a fast growing field in brain science. What adults communicate to children and how children internalize the messages intended or implied can impact motivation, resilience, self-image, self-esteem and whether or not a child has confidence to take chances and try new things. As teachers and parents we have a heavy responsibility, based on this new research, to choose our words carefully and understand their potential influence. At Explorer Elementary we understand that our words hold weight and we practice and reflect on how we speak to the children in our care.
Carol Dweck the author of Mindset, the New Psychology of Success, gives some insight on how a child’s view of him or herself is formed and how this view will drive the way they conduct their life. Dweck argues that there are two kinds of mindset; a growth mindset and a fixed mindset. A fixed mindset is a belief that all of a person’s qualities are fixed, a person is born with a set of talents and traits and they are fixed, they can’t be changed. A growth mindset is a belief that whatever traits and talents you are born with is just a starting point. Traits and talents can be cultivated or new talents created, changed and grown. A growth mindset is a belief that with hard work and perseverance anyone can be or do anything. Carol Dweck’s research discusses how mindsets are formed through the internalized images and assumed messages about one’s traits, abilities and talents, starting at an early age. The beautiful thing about mindset theory is finding out that a fixed mindset can be changed…
Below is a video about mindset, a reminder of how our words impact children’s motivation and sense of self.
http://youtu.be/NWv1VdDeoRY
Language
Here is a modified handout created for a parenting education class on the role of language in the social emotional development of children. It gives some hints about how the language used by adults is internalized and perceived by children. It also gives some great alternatives to some of the commonly used negative language adults use when interacting with children.
Guidelines for Spoken Interactions with Children
Use a calm voice.
o Calming yourself models effective communication practices for your children and lowers the emotional climate.
Use questions whenever possible. Questions require the child to process ideas as opposed to passive listening.
o “We have 10 minutes before we leave for school. What do you need to get together before we leave the house?”
o “Yesterday when you were playing with your brother, you had problems with sharing. What are you going to do today to make sure you both have a turn?”
Make sure limits statements are clearly defined and understood.
o “We use quiet voices in the house.” At times it is helpful to model or have children demonstrate the expectations.
Avoid using labels when referring to behavior, e.g. “bad,’ “naughty, noisy, wild.”
o Language that is descriptive is more effective, e.g. “You’re using a loud voice today. What does a calmer voice sound like?”
o “I see pencil marks on the table. We use pencils on paper. Here is a wet wipe to clean the table.”
Make statements in positive, rather than negative form
o “The toys go in the basket,” rather than “ Don’t leave the toys on the floor.’
Think about the timing of your statements.
o A reminding statement before an incident is likely to happen, is more valuable than a conversation in reaction to what has already happened.
o “Remind me how many minutes we decided it takes to get our shoes on.”
Be sure that the bulk of the responsibility for resolving problems rests with the child. You can act as a guide to help them describe the problem, develop solutions and choose a plan. Make sure that they have a significant share of the conversation beyond “yes,” or “no.”
Phrasing Requests in the Positive
“Don’t run in the house!” creates an image in the mind of a person running in the house. “We walk in the house.” Creates an image of the desired behavior.
Instead of...
Stop grabbing things from your sister!
Don’t jump on the couch!
Don’t talk so loud in the library!
Don’t open the box of cookies.
Try...
Use your words to tell your sister what you need.
Feet belong on the floor.
Use your whisper voice in the library.
Cookies stay in the box until after dinner.
Problem Solving
Problem-solving according to How to Talk So Kids Will Listen and Listen so Kids Will Talk by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish
1. Talk about the child’s feelings and needs.
2. Talk about your feelings and needs.
3. Brainstorm together to find a mutually agreeable solution.
4. Write down all ideas—without evaluating.
5. Decide which suggestions you like, which you don’t like, and which you plan to follow through on.
Second Step Problem Solving Steps
1. Calm Yourself:
· Take four of five deep breaths
· If you are not ready to try to problem solve yet, come back to it later.
2. Describe the Problem
· Both parties describe the problem as they see it using an ‘I- Message’ (I feel
upset when my children are behaving in unkind ways toward each other ).
3. Develop Possible Solutions Together:
· Is it safe?
· Is it fair?
· Will it work?
4. Choose A Solution
5. Try a different solution if the one you chose is not working
Explorer believes in teaching a social curriculum that helps build the classrooms and our school into a learning community where high social and academic goals are both attained. The focus of the social curriculum is on establishing productive social and working relationships with others. The implementation of the social curriculum helps children develop social skills such as responsibility, empathy and cooperation. It also encourages children:
- to care about themselves through building positive self-concepts
- to care about other people
- to respect and value diversity, including, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation
- to care about the world around them through teaching awareness of real-world issues and through service learning projects
The social curriculum is not taught as a separate entity, but is a part of everything the child does within the school setting. It is included in playground activities, gatherings and exploratory classes (Art, Active Education, Science, and Music)
Social emotional learning is teaching a way of being. It involves how you see others, and how you communicate and relate to other people. In social emotional learning, we teach students to recognize feelings, to empathize, to care about others. We teach students to assume the best intentions, and we do the same as teachers. We teach students to look at different perspectives, to value other opinions and ideas, and to express their own opinions and ideas in clear ways. We teach students how to work with others, how to share materials and space, and how to solve problems that arise. We teach students how to show their very best selves and to take pride in the work they are doing. We teach them to do the right thing because it helps them or helps the community. When we leave the classroom, the way we interact with the world is still closely related to the way we practice SEL in the classroom. It's the way we hope all human beings think about and interact with each other and the world.
Project Based Learning provides the context in which this learning can occur. It places students in learning environments that are student centered and collaborative. It is assumed in projects that students will try their best because they care about the work and they care about the community that is directly affected by the work (whether that is their audience or the group members they are collaborating with). If a student does not do his/her share of the work, they learn what this means for the rest of the group. They discuss and communicate openly. PBL provides opportunities for students to share opinions, to disagree, to share materials, and to problem solve when conflicts arise. PBL topics can be directly related to social emotional learning, particularly when we are trying to make positive changes in people's lives through a project (ex. valuing immigrant contributions, finding solutions for climate change or agricultural sustainability, empowering our community to be healthier). Basically, without PBL, we would be missing the context in which social emotional learning opportunities authentically arise.
So the two go hand in hand. Without SEL, PBL would not be successful, and without PBL, there would be limited opportunities to teach SEL in authentic context.
Explorer’s social curriculum has been successfully implemented over the past 15+ years. It has integrated learning, teaching and caring into the daily school program. A high priority is placed on the development of each child’s personal growth, sense of respect for self and others and social responsibility to prepare them for continued success in future academic and social endeavors.
The implementation of the social curriculum requires a commitment of time. It takes time to develop within children life-long characteristics of responsibility, self-discipline and cooperation. It takes time when children are allowed to be a part of the decision making process and to be problem solvers. It takes time to be consistent in following through on consequences for inappropriate behaviors. It takes time to help children establish caring behaviors so that they can become contributing members of society. It is a priority at Explorer to spend time helping children develop positive social skills.
The School Community
The school community includes the faculty, the children, the parents, the staff, and the administrators. The way in which all of these groups interact with each other has an effect upon the child, so we all strive to communicate openly and directly with one another. For a school to be true to the values of the social curriculum, support from each group is necessary.
The Teacher
The teachers are the primary source for implementing the social curriculum at school. They are the ones who have daily contact with the children over an extended period of time. They model ethical behavior and nurture the child’s character in the school setting. The teacher creates a class community where the children come to know that the group is valued, the individual is respected, and each one has a responsibility within the class. The teacher:
- works toward establishing a safe atmosphere that the child senses through the physical environment and experiences through personal interactions. Children are active learners so there is time planned for them to converse, work together, and to move about.
- fosters a positive self-image. Each child is a unique individual with specific needs. Each grows and develops at a different rate. There is a trust in the child and a respect for each child’s diversity. Teachers find each child’s genius.
- encourages growth in responsibility, independence, and decision-making.
- views themselves as a significant person in the life of the child.
The Parent
Since the adults are the models in our community, it is important that the actions of the adults are consistent with the values of the social emotional curriculum. To bridge the home-school connection, we highly encourage attendance at Parent Education, where social emotional concepts will be taught.
Helpful Resources
The Risks of RewardsBy Alfie Kohn
Many educators are acutely aware that punishment and threats are counterproductive. Making children suffer in order to alter their future behavior can often elicit temporary compliance, but this strategy is unlikely to help children become ethical, compassionate decision makers. Punishment, even if referred to euphemistically as “consequences,” tends to generate anger, defiance, and a desire for revenge. Moreover, it models the use of power rather than reason and ruptures the important relationship between adult and child.
Of those teachers and parents who make a point of not punishing children, a significant proportion turn instead to the use of rewards. The ways in which rewards are used, as well as the values that are considered important, differ among (and within) cultures. This digest, however, deals with typical practices in classrooms in the United States, where stickers and stars, A’s and praise, awards and privileges, are routinely used to induce children to learn or comply with an adult’s demands (Fantuzzo et al., 1991). As with punishments, the offer of rewards can elicit temporary compliance in many cases. Unfortunately, carrots turn out to be no more effective than sticks at helping children to become caring, responsible people or lifelong, self-directed learners.
REWARDS VS. GOOD VALUES
Studies over many years have found that behavior modification programs are rarely successful at producing lasting changes in attitudes or even behavior. When the rewards stop, people usually return to the way they acted before the program began. More disturbingly, researchers have recently discovered that children whose parents make frequent use of rewards tend to be less generous than their peers (Fabes et al., 1989; Grusec, 1991; Kohn 1990).
Indeed, extrinsic motivators do not alter the emotional or cognitive commitments that underlie behavior–at least not in a desirable direction. A child promised a treat for learning or acting responsibly has been given every reason to stop doing so when there is no longer a reward to be gained.
Research and logic suggest that punishment and rewards are not really opposites, but two sides of the same coin. Both strategies amount to ways of trying to manipulate someone’s behavior–in one case, prompting the question, “What do they want me to do, and what happens to me if I don’t do it?”, and in the other instance, leading a child to ask, “What do they want me to do, and what do I get for doing it?” Neither strategy helps children to grapple with the question, “What kind of person do I want to be?”
REWARDS VS. ACHIEVEMENT
Rewards are no more helpful at enhancing achievement than they are at fostering good values. At least two dozen studies have shown that people expecting to receive a reward for completing a task (or for doing it successfully) simply do not perform as well as those who expect nothing (Kohn, 1993). This effect is robust for young children, older children, and adults; for males and females; for rewards of all kinds; and for tasks ranging from memorizing facts to designing collages to solving problems. In general, the more cognitive sophistication and open-ended thinking that is required for a task, the worse people tend to do when they have been led to perform that task for a reward.
There are several plausible explanations for this puzzling but remarkably consistent finding. The most compelling of these is that rewards cause people to lose interest in whatever they were rewarded for doing. This phenomenon, which has been demonstrated in scores of studies (Kohn, 1993), makes sense given that “motivation” is not a single characteristic that an individual possesses to a greater or lesser degree. Rather, intrinsic motivation (an interest in the task for its own sake) is qualitatively different from extrinsic motivation (in which completion of the task is seen chiefly as a prerequisite for obtaining something else) (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Therefore, the question educators need to ask is not how motivated their students are, but how their students are motivated.
In one representative study, young children were introduced to an unfamiliar beverage called kefir. Some were just asked to drink it; others were praised lavishly for doing so; a third group was promised treats if they drank enough. Those children who received either verbal or tangible rewards consumed more of the beverage than other children, as one might predict. But a week later these children found it significantly less appealing than they did before, whereas children who were offered no rewards liked it just as much as, if not more than, they had earlier (Birch et al., 1984). If we substitute reading or doing math or acting generously for drinking kefir, we begin to glimpse the destructive power of rewards. The data suggest that the more we want children to want to do something, the more counterproductive it will be to reward them for doing it.
Deci and Ryan (1985) describe the use of rewards as “control through seduction.” Control, whether by threats or bribes, amounts to doing things to children rather than working with them. This ultimately frays relationships, both among students (leading to reduced interest in working with peers) and between students and adults (insofar as asking for help may reduce the probability of receiving a reward).
Moreover, students who are encouraged to think about grades, stickers, or other “goodies” become less inclined to explore ideas, think creatively, and take chances. At least ten studies have shown that people offered a reward generally choose the easiest possible task (Kohn, 1993). In the absence of rewards, by contrast, children are inclined to pick tasks that are just beyond their current level of ability.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE FAILURE OF REWARDS
The implications of this analysis and these data are troubling. If the question is “Do rewards motivate students?”, the answer is, “Absolutely: they motivate students to get rewards.” Unfortunately, that sort of motivation often comes at the expense of interest in, and excellence at, whatever they are doing. What is required, then, is nothing short of a transformation of our schools.
First, classroom management programs that rely on rewards and consequences ought to be avoided by any educator who wants students to take responsibility for their own (and others’) behavior–and by any educator who places internalization of positive values ahead of mindless obedience. The alternative to bribes and threats is to work toward creating a caring community whose members solve problems collaboratively and decide together how they want their classroom to be (DeVries & Zan, 1994; Solomon et al., 1992).
Second, grades in particular have been found to have a detrimental effect on creative thinking, long-term retention, interest in learning, and preference for challenging tasks (Butler & Nisan, 1986; Grolnick & Ryan, 1987). These detrimental effects are not the result of too many bad grades, too many good grades, or the wrong formula for calculating grades. Rather, they result from the practice of grading itself, and the extrinsic orientation it promotes. Parental use of rewards or consequences to induce children to do well in school has a similarly negative effect on enjoyment of learning and, ultimately, on achievement (Gottfried et al., 1994). Avoiding these effects requires assessment practices geared toward helping students experience success and failure not as reward and punishment, but as information.
Finally, this distinction between reward and information might be applied to positive feedback as well. While it can be useful to hear about one’s successes, and highly desirable to receive support and encouragement from adults, most praise is tantamount to verbal reward. Rather than helping children to develop their own criteria for successful learning or desirable behavior, praise can create a growing dependence on securing someone else’s approval. Rather than offering unconditional support, praise makes a positive response conditional on doing what the adult demands. Rather than heightening interest in a task, the learning is devalued insofar as it comes to be seen as a prerequisite for receiving the teacher’s approval (Kohn, 1993).
CONCLUSION
In short, good values have to be grown from the inside out. Attempts to short-circuit this process by dangling rewards in front of children are at best ineffective, and at worst counterproductive. Children are likely to become enthusiastic, lifelong learners as a result of being provided with an engaging curriculum; a safe, caring community in which to discover and create; and a significant degree of choice about what (and how and why) they are learning. Rewards–like punishments–are unnecessary when these things are present, and are ultimately destructive in any case.
Copyright © 1994 by Alfie Kohn. This article may be downloaded, reproduced, and distributed without permission as long as each copy includes this notice along with citation information (i.e., name of the periodical in which it originally appeared, date of publication, and author’s name). Permission must be obtained in order to reprint this article in a published work or in order to offer it for sale in any form. Please write to the address indicated on the Contact Us page.
Intrinsic Motivation vs. Extrinsic Motivation
We assume that all students want to do what’s best for their community and for themselves. We want students to do the right thing, even when no one is looking. For this reason, we do not use extrinsic motivators such as rewards or punishments to influence children’s behavior. This means no table points, smiley faces, stickers, sticker charts, names on the board, detention, etc.
Instead, we spend a lot of time building community, and discussing reasons why we do things. We teach students to think about what people are feeling when they are around them. For example, we ask students to walk in the hallway so that everyone is safe, not so they don’t get in trouble. We ask students to keep voices at a zero in the hallway so that other classes can learn without distractions. Much of the thinking is centered around the big idea that our actions affect others (empathy).
Even small things, like putting supplies away, are framed in the context of the whole community. For example, when crayons are left out of the box and just placed in the basket, a student might give a message to the whole class. “When I was trying to get crayons, it was hard because someone had just thrown a bunch of crayons in the bin without putting them back in the box. If you’re doing that, please stop. It makes it hard for whoever has to clean up your mess.”
In the same way, when some students struggle with empathy or social awareness, we talk about how our actions make people have thoughts about us. For example, when a student who had troubled with empathy pulled a chair out from behind another student on purpose, we had a private conversation. “When you pull out his chair on purpose, people think things about you. What do you think they might think? If they have these thoughts about you, how might they act toward you? Is that what you want?” We discuss expected and unexpected behaviors, and push students to become social detectives, attuned to social situations and social cues.
Our expectations for doing beautiful and rigorous work are also a part of the culture. Students understand that they do not work toward a grade, but rather toward expectations to do their best work. When students are having trouble completing work on time, this discussion is private. This can be done using progress reports, or one on one conversations, as well as emails and parent communication. We work to preserve the dignity of students, and so we take care to think about classroom management that might shame them. At the same time, we make sure to make clear the importance of completing work and of being prepared. Project work does not work when some people do not do their part, and we encourage groups to talk to individuals in the group who have dropped the ball and not done their part.
Logical Consequences
While we do not use extrinsic motivators such as fear of punishment or rewards, logical consequences must be consistent. A logical consequence is related to the behavior. For example, if a student had ample time to complete work in class, but was too distracted, he or she might have to take it home to complete. Another example is if a student is having trouble taking turns speaking at the rug and is interrupting others, they may have to sit elsewhere after a few reminders. In the hallway, this might mean having to go back and practice walking quietly if a class is having a hard time doing so. It is helpful to have a debriefing conversation after a student has experienced a logical consequence to process what the problem was and how they could improve in the future.
Mistakes
Our school values mistakes as opportunities for learning. When students make academic errors, these are seen as valuable mistakes. When students exhibit unexpected behavior, these are seen as valuable mistakes. We separate the behavior from the identity of the child, preserving their identity as a good person who wants to do their best for themselves and their community. We do, however, address the problem and the mistake. This is essential, as we don’t want students to see themselves as bad or good, smart or dumb. Growth mindset plays an important role in both academic and social situations.
Mindset
Here’s a quick introduction on mindset and how it alters motivation. The staff at Explorer had a professional development dedicated around Carol Dweck’s book, Mindset, the New Psychology of Success.
The following excerpt is from The Power of Our Words by Paula Denton. It is a great example of how a child’s motivation and self-identity can be narrowed to a ‘fixed’ mindset by just one sentence.
(Adapted from The Power of Our Words by Paula Denton)
When Don was five, his mother, who loved to sing, enrolled him in a children’s choir. “I had a very deep, booming voice for a little boy and, I suppose, a tin ear as well,” Don recalled. “But I loved going to choir practice and singing with the other kids. I liked to stand in the front row and sing my heart out!” One day, as the group was preparing to perform, the music teacher said to Don, “Let’s have you move to the back row and try just mouthing the words.” “That was the moment that I learned that I was not a singer,” Don said, chuckling. “I never wanted to go back to choir practice again.”
…The teacher’s belief that Don was not a singer, and never would be, came through to him loud and clear, even at the young age of five. The fact that Don, now forty eight, still remembers and still tells this story shows that her words had a deep impact on his developing sense of self. The words narrowed his sense of possible identities rather than broadening them. Rather than helping Don learn how to sing better, this teacher effectively stopped Don’s motivation to sing.
What we say matters. In fact, it matters a lot. There is a good deal of research being conducted on the role of language and its effects on the brain and learning. Attribution theory is a fast growing field in brain science. What adults communicate to children and how children internalize the messages intended or implied can impact motivation, resilience, self-image, self-esteem and whether or not a child has confidence to take chances and try new things. As teachers and parents we have a heavy responsibility, based on this new research, to choose our words carefully and understand their potential influence. At Explorer Elementary we understand that our words hold weight and we practice and reflect on how we speak to the children in our care.
Carol Dweck the author of Mindset, the New Psychology of Success, gives some insight on how a child’s view of him or herself is formed and how this view will drive the way they conduct their life. Dweck argues that there are two kinds of mindset; a growth mindset and a fixed mindset. A fixed mindset is a belief that all of a person’s qualities are fixed, a person is born with a set of talents and traits and they are fixed, they can’t be changed. A growth mindset is a belief that whatever traits and talents you are born with is just a starting point. Traits and talents can be cultivated or new talents created, changed and grown. A growth mindset is a belief that with hard work and perseverance anyone can be or do anything. Carol Dweck’s research discusses how mindsets are formed through the internalized images and assumed messages about one’s traits, abilities and talents, starting at an early age. The beautiful thing about mindset theory is finding out that a fixed mindset can be changed…
Below is a video about mindset, a reminder of how our words impact children’s motivation and sense of self.
http://youtu.be/NWv1VdDeoRY
Language
Here is a modified handout created for a parenting education class on the role of language in the social emotional development of children. It gives some hints about how the language used by adults is internalized and perceived by children. It also gives some great alternatives to some of the commonly used negative language adults use when interacting with children.
Guidelines for Spoken Interactions with Children
Use a calm voice.
o Calming yourself models effective communication practices for your children and lowers the emotional climate.
Use questions whenever possible. Questions require the child to process ideas as opposed to passive listening.
o “We have 10 minutes before we leave for school. What do you need to get together before we leave the house?”
o “Yesterday when you were playing with your brother, you had problems with sharing. What are you going to do today to make sure you both have a turn?”
Make sure limits statements are clearly defined and understood.
o “We use quiet voices in the house.” At times it is helpful to model or have children demonstrate the expectations.
Avoid using labels when referring to behavior, e.g. “bad,’ “naughty, noisy, wild.”
o Language that is descriptive is more effective, e.g. “You’re using a loud voice today. What does a calmer voice sound like?”
o “I see pencil marks on the table. We use pencils on paper. Here is a wet wipe to clean the table.”
Make statements in positive, rather than negative form
o “The toys go in the basket,” rather than “ Don’t leave the toys on the floor.’
Think about the timing of your statements.
o A reminding statement before an incident is likely to happen, is more valuable than a conversation in reaction to what has already happened.
o “Remind me how many minutes we decided it takes to get our shoes on.”
Be sure that the bulk of the responsibility for resolving problems rests with the child. You can act as a guide to help them describe the problem, develop solutions and choose a plan. Make sure that they have a significant share of the conversation beyond “yes,” or “no.”
Phrasing Requests in the Positive
“Don’t run in the house!” creates an image in the mind of a person running in the house. “We walk in the house.” Creates an image of the desired behavior.
Instead of...
Stop grabbing things from your sister!
Don’t jump on the couch!
Don’t talk so loud in the library!
Don’t open the box of cookies.
Try...
Use your words to tell your sister what you need.
Feet belong on the floor.
Use your whisper voice in the library.
Cookies stay in the box until after dinner.
Problem Solving
Problem-solving according to How to Talk So Kids Will Listen and Listen so Kids Will Talk by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish
1. Talk about the child’s feelings and needs.
2. Talk about your feelings and needs.
3. Brainstorm together to find a mutually agreeable solution.
4. Write down all ideas—without evaluating.
5. Decide which suggestions you like, which you don’t like, and which you plan to follow through on.
Second Step Problem Solving Steps
1. Calm Yourself:
· Take four of five deep breaths
· If you are not ready to try to problem solve yet, come back to it later.
2. Describe the Problem
· Both parties describe the problem as they see it using an ‘I- Message’ (I feel
upset when my children are behaving in unkind ways toward each other ).
3. Develop Possible Solutions Together:
· Is it safe?
· Is it fair?
· Will it work?
4. Choose A Solution
5. Try a different solution if the one you chose is not working