Providing cash incentives to students for good grades, passing standardized tests, attending school, and completing homework has been a hot topic. Read about it here and here.
“In Chicago, the nation’s third-largest school system distributed payouts on Oct. 16 totaling more than $265,000 to 1,650 freshmen in 20 high schools as part of the privately funded “Green for Grades” program unveiled last month. Freshmen and sophomores receive $50 for A’s, $35 for B’s and $20 for C’s every five weeks.”
“In the District of Columbia, meanwhile, students at 15 public middle schools received their first reward checks for good grades and behavior. On Oct. 17, students earned $137,813 from the Capital Gains program, a new venture between the school district and Harvard University. Under the program, students are eligible for up to $100 month for attendance, homework, good behavior, and good grades.”
Instead of experimenting with cash incentives for improving student achievement, why not look for ways to make learning more relevant to students? It is important while children are young to instill a love for learning, rather than growing a “what do I get for it?” mentality. Children are born with an innate sense of curiosity, exploring the world around them and yearning to learn new skills. Somewhere along the way, it seems, schools are squelching this yearning. Why is that?
Perhaps it is boredom. One of the reasons students often cite for dropping out of school is a lack of interest in what they were learning and how it was relevant in the “real world.” A growing number of anecdotal accounts about narrowing curriculum suggest a possible reason that children lose interest. Many schools emphasize the mindless repetition of basic reading and math skills, conduct endless test preparation, and demand only the regurgitation of factoids about historical people and events presented in hopelessly dull textbooks created by committees. Children of all ages are capable of more, and examples abound of schools that both embrace a rigorous, well-rounded curriculum and that perform well on standardized tests as a byproduct rather than an end in and of itself.
I’d venture to say that schools providing a full liberal arts curriculum including sciences, social studies, the arts, technology, and math do not need to offer cash incentives to entice their students to do better.
It is inconclusive whether these cash incentive programs actually make gains in student achievement, but it is likely that they do not espouse a love for learning-and after all, isn’t learning what school is all about?