 |
Every teacher in every classroom throughout the country uses
strategies to acknowledge and encourage appropriate social and academic
behavior by their students. These
strategies take many forms, some overt and dramatic (presentation of tokens, or
recognition at an assembly), others more subtle and embedded in natural
activities (a smile, the organization of a successful academic effort). Our understanding of this process of
encouraging appropriate behavior, and how best to incorporate this process in
education, has been a major focus of both research and recent professional
controversy. As a result, understanding
the role and function of rewards is now a central concern for
any educator.
Since 1898, when E. L. Thorndike described the “law of
effect,” educators and psychologists have noted that when a behavior is
successful it is more likely to occur again in similar circumstances. The “success” of a behavior lies in the result,
effect or consequence that behavior has on the environment. The simple message is that the consequences
of a behavior affect future performance of that behavior. If, following the contingent delivery of a
consequence, a behavior becomes more likely in the future, then that
consequence was reinforcing or rewarding.
This basic idea has been among the most intensely studied and validated
phenomena associated with human behavior.
The use of rewards in education remains a controversy, not over the principles governing its function, but in part due to two issues: (a) the precise definition of rewards, and (b) the perceived effect of rewards on “intrinsic motivation.”
The use of rewards in education remains a controversy, not over the principles governing its function, but in part due to two issues: (a) the precise definition of rewards, and (b) the perceived effect of rewards on “intrinsic motivation.”
Defining rewards
Rewards (or the more accurate term: reinforcers) are
technically defined as any contingently delivered consequence (e.g. event,
activity, object) associated with an increase in the future likelihood of a
behavior in similar situations. This
definition has many problems when used in natural contexts like homes, schools
and communities. When applied in a
rigorous and precise manner, the definition allows an object or event to be
classified as a reward, or reinforcer, only after demonstration that (a) the object/event
was delivered contingent upon the performance of a behavior, and (b) the behavior
became more likely to occur under similar conditions in the future. In practice, teachers and parents seldom wait
to see the effect of a consequence on future occurrences of the behavior. It is far more likely that a teacher will simply
presume that she/he has provided
rewards when praise is delivered following “sharing,” or points are assigned
for correct problem completion, or access to preferred toys follows work
completion.
Herein lies an important distinction. The technical definition of a reward
(reinforcer) always adopts the perspective of the learner, not the intentions
of the person delivering the reward. If
the contingent delivery of a consequence resulted in increased likelihood of
that behavior then the consequence was a reward. If the consequence was a piece of preferred
fruit, and the behavior increased, then the fruit was a reward; if the
consequence was a sticker, and the behavior increased, then the sticker was a
reward; if the consequence was a reprimand (which included adult attention),
and the behavior increased, then the reprimand was a reward. It is the effect
of the consequence on future behavior that determines if that consequence is a
reward (reinforcer). If a consequence
does not lead to increased likelihood of the behavior, then it was not a
reward, even if the person delivering the consequence had the best of
intensions. If a teacher’s praise for
“on-task” working is followed by a reduction in level of being “on-task” then
the teacher’s praise was not a functional reward (reinforcer). If the delivery of tokens for sharing on the
playground does not lead to increased sharing then the tokens were not a
reward. From a technical perspective,
rewards are defined by the effect they have on behavior, not on their intended
desirability. In this way, we can never
define an event, activity or object as a reward without connecting it to the
behavior that was affected by contingent access to that event, activity or object. Practically, teachers will deliver feedback
and consequences that they “presume” are rewards. Those teachers with technical knowledge,
however, will always check the effect of that presumed reward on student
behavior.
Understanding rewards is of special importance for teaching
because while we want desirable behavior to be rewarded, we do not want
undesirable behavior to be rewarded. A
reprimand, for example, may not have been intended to be a reward, but may
still function in that capacity. One of
the more common findings in schools is that teachers inadvertently reward
inappropriate child behavior by attending to talking out, or disruptive acts. Similarly being sent to the office may be
rewarding if it involves escaping from aversive or difficult work. If a behavior is contingently followed by (a)
obtaining a desirable event/activity/object or (b) avoiding an aversive
event/activity/object then the behavior will become more likely to occur in
similar situations in the future. Said differently, the behavior has been
rewarded.
Rewards are important for both encouraging appropriate
behavior and preventing the encouragement of inappropriate behavior. What the
science of human behavior teaches, is that we should adopt the perspective of
the learner, not the teacher, when planning how to select and deliver rewards.
The following are some basic guidelines:
- Reward “behavior” not people. When rewards are provided be clear about the specific behavior that led to the reward.
- Include the learner in identification of possible rewards. Use consequences that are likely to be rewarding to the students.
- Use small rewards frequently, rather than large rewards infrequently.
- Embed rewards in the activity/behavior you want to encourage.
- Ensure that rewards closely follow the behavior you want to encourage. Generally behavior is more likely to change when the reward is delivered quickly.
- Use rewards that are natural to the context, appropriate to the developmental age of the learner and easy to administer.
- Use many different kinds of rewards (objects, activities, privileges, attention, natural consequences) rather than relying on one strategy or pattern.
- Use rewards more often than negative consequences. Students should experience at least five times the number of rewards as they do corrections or punishers.
- Avoid delivering rewards (even inadvertently) for problem behaviors.
The Impact of Rewards
on Intrinsic Motivation
Recently, there has been concern that the formal use of
rewards in schools could result in children failing to develop intrinsic, or
self-managed motivation. Reading should be a
behavior that becomes more frequent because the content of what is read is
rewarding, not because a token or play period will follow reading. Sharing on the playground should occur
because a child experiences personal satisfaction from behaving well, not
because the child receives candy if she shares.
Similarly, concern exists that if a teacher provides a reward to Child A
for excellent math work, it will be a negative, or punishing, experience for Child
B who did not receive a reward, tried just as hard, but did not get as many
problems correct. These concerns are
based on research conducted in the 1970s (Deci, 1971; 1975; Lepper, Greene
& Nesbett, 1973) and have led to strong recommendations against the formal
use of praise and extrinsic rewards (e.g. tokens, food, activities, privileges)
in schools (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 2001; Kohn, 1993; 1996). There is evidence that rewards can be used
poorly. The primary errors involve (a)
providing rewards without being clear about the behavior being rewarded, (b)
inadvertently providing rewards for problem behavior, (c) providing large
rewards and then suddenly (rather than gradually) withdrawing the rewards, and
(d) providing rewards so infrequently that a child never builds the skill
fluency needed to attain the natural benefit of a skill (e.g. does not learn to
read fast enough or well enough to enjoy reading). These errors are worth considering and
avoiding.
The concern that rewards damage the intrinsic motivation of
students is less well supported by research.
Most educators will agree that academic and social skills learned in
schools should be maintained by natural consequence, not artificial
rewards. Reading , math and play skills should not end
when a teacher is no longer present to offer verbal praise, toys, or stickers. The rewards provided for the behavior of one
student should not function as a punisher for all others. There is less agreement (and much less evidence)
that the use of rewards in schools leads to these ill effects.
To address these concerns several scholars recently examined
the full body of research literature and concluded that not only have schools
successfully employed the use of external rewards for decades (Slavin, 1997),
but that the use of rewards following appropriate behavior is directly related
to both initial, and durable academic and social success. Rewards are an effective, important and
functional part of any educational context, and need not be detrimental to
intrinsic motivation (Akin-Little, Eckert Lovett & Little, 2004; Cameron,
Banko & Pierce, 2001; Reiss, 2005).
Rewards are especially important for helping motivate a child to build early
competence (fluency) with reading, math or social skills. Encouragement, guidance and reward of
appropriate approximations of successful behavior are helpful for students to
build the skills that can then be sustained by the natural consequences from
reading well, joining games with peers, or playing a musical instrument. Rewards also are important for building a
predictable, positive social culture in a school. Schools with clearly defined behavioral
expectations, and formal strategies for acknowledging (rewarding) appropriate
behavior, are perceived as safer, more effective learning environments. The delivery of rewards is one overt way that
children learn that adults are serious about the social and academic goals they
are teaching.
Understanding and using rewards is an essential skill for
any educator. Selecting the right type,
level and form of rewards to encourage student behavior is a competence
developed over time, and is a hallmark of effective teaching.
References
Akin-Little, K., Eckert, T., Lovett, B., & Little, S.
(2004). Extrinsic reinforcement in the
classroom: Bribery or best practice. School Psychology Review, 33, 344-362.
Cameron, J., Banko, K. & Pierce, W. (2001). Pervasive negative effects of rewards on
intrinsic motivation: The myth continues.
The Behavior Analyst, 24, 1-44.
Deci, E. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on
intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 18, 105-115.
Deci, E., (1975). Intrinsic
Motivation. New York : Plenum Press.
Deci, E., Koestner, R., & Ryan R. (2001). Extrinsic rewards and intrinsic motivation in
education: Reconsidered once again. Review of Educational Research, 71,
1-27.
Kohn, A. (1993). Punished by rewards: The trouble with gold
stars, incentive plans, A’s, praise and other bribes. Boston : Houghton Mifflin.
Lepper, M. Greene, D., & Nisbett, R., (1973). Undermining children’s intrinsic interest
with extrinsic reward: A test of the “overjustification” hypothesis. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 28, 129-137.
Reiss, S., (2005). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation at 30:
Unresolved scientific issues. The Behavior Analyst 28 (1), 1-14.
Slavin, R. E. (1997).
Educational Psychology (5th
ed). Needham Heights
