Should Rewards and Punishment Be Used to Instil Motivation in Students?
Gold stars, best-student awards and other reward-focused incentive systems have
long been part of the currency of schools throughout the world. Typically intended to
motivate or reinforce student learning, such techniques have been widely used and
advocated by educators everywhere. In his speech during Singapore’s National Day Rally
2007, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong stated that there will be a launch of two initiatives
in secondary schools, namely the Malay Special Programme (MSP). In the
implementation of these programmes, incentives like bonus points for junior college
admission will be given to encourage students to study Malay as a third language. This
further illustrates the significant role extrinsic rewards have in education and its
numerous policies. Even on a national scale, extrinsic rewards have been acknowledged
to be able to motivate students’ learning.
However, in recent years, a few commentators have questioned the widespread
use of rewards and punishment. A major point of controversy is that in educational
settings, the use of rewards and incentives can undermine students’ intrinsic motivation
(Deci & Ryan, 1980). Since intrinsic motivation is essential for learning and adjustment
in educational settings (Ryan & La Guardia, 1999), this issue has become a hotbed for
debate. Several competing theories had been formulated to account for reward effects
whereas procedures and conclusions reached in early studies were questioned and
contested (Scott, 1975; Feingold & Mahoney, 1975). A meta-analysis (Cameron & Pierce,
1994) concluded that that the undermining effect was minimal and largely
inconsequential for educational policies. However, a more recent meta-analysis showed
that tangible rewards do indeed have a substantial undermining effect (Deci, Koestner &
Ryan, 1999). If that is true, the incentive systems educators designed were actually doing
more harm than good. How
long been part of the currency of schools throughout the world. Typically intended to
motivate or reinforce student learning, such techniques have been widely used and
advocated by educators everywhere. In his speech during Singapore’s National Day Rally
2007, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong stated that there will be a launch of two initiatives
in secondary schools, namely the Malay Special Programme (MSP). In the
implementation of these programmes, incentives like bonus points for junior college
admission will be given to encourage students to study Malay as a third language. This
further illustrates the significant role extrinsic rewards have in education and its
numerous policies. Even on a national scale, extrinsic rewards have been acknowledged
to be able to motivate students’ learning.
However, in recent years, a few commentators have questioned the widespread
use of rewards and punishment. A major point of controversy is that in educational
settings, the use of rewards and incentives can undermine students’ intrinsic motivation
(Deci & Ryan, 1980). Since intrinsic motivation is essential for learning and adjustment
in educational settings (Ryan & La Guardia, 1999), this issue has become a hotbed for
debate. Several competing theories had been formulated to account for reward effects
whereas procedures and conclusions reached in early studies were questioned and
contested (Scott, 1975; Feingold & Mahoney, 1975). A meta-analysis (Cameron & Pierce,
1994) concluded that that the undermining effect was minimal and largely
inconsequential for educational policies. However, a more recent meta-analysis showed
that tangible rewards do indeed have a substantial undermining effect (Deci, Koestner &
Ryan, 1999). If that is true, the incentive systems educators designed were actually doing
more harm than good. How
References: Alfie Kohn. (1996). By All Available Means: Cameron and Pierce’s Defense of Extrinsic Motivators. Review of Educational Research, 66, 1-4. Dale H. Schunk. (1996). Goal and Self-Evaluative Influences during Children’s Cognitive Skill Learning. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 359-382. Edward L. Deci & Richard M. Ryan. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67. Edward L. Deci, Richard Koestner, Richard M. Ryan. (2001). Extrinsic Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation in Education: Reconsidered Once again. Review of Educational Research, 71, 1-27. Edwin A. Locke, Gary P. Latham, Miriam Erez. (1988, January). The Determinants of Goal Commitment. The Academy of Management Review, 13, 23-39. Hashim, R. & Tan, C. (2007). A hyphenated identity: fostering national unity through education in Malaysia and Singapore Judy Cameron Kathleen S. Crittenden & Mary Glenn Wiley. (1980). Causal Attribution and Behavioural Response to Failure. Social Psychology Quarterly, 43, 353-358. Kathryn Kernodle Loveland & J. Gregory Olley. (1979). The Effect of External Reward on Interest and Quality of Task Performance in Children of High and Low Intrinsic Motivation. Child Development, 50, 1207-1210. Leonard H. King. (1993, March). High and Low Achievers’ Perceptions and Cooperative Learning in Two Small Groups. The Elementary School Journal, 93, 399-416. Suzanne Hidi & Judith M. Harackiewicz. (2000). Motivation the Academically Unmotivated: A Critical Issue for the 21st Century. Review of Educational Research, 70, 151-179. Thung, J.L. (2007). The challenge for multiculturalism in Indonesia in Critical Perspectives on Values Education in Asia. Singapore: Pearson Prentice Hall, Chapter 7. Kim-chong Chong & Charlene Tan (2007). Criticial Perspectives on Values Education in Asia. Singapore: Pearson Prentice Hall.