Increasing Motivation

Daniel Pink says that in the business world the idea of using a "carrots and sticks" (rewards/punishment) system is a mismatch to what science tells us works for motivating people to perform.  After watching Daniel Pink's presentation over autonomy, mastery, and purpose, I see a correlation not only to motivating my students but also how the state attempts to motivate teachers.

I see everyday how the "carrots and sticks" system fails in the classroom.  We think if we dangle the carrot or provide some sort of extrinsic motivation we will get increased effort from our students.  On that same note we believe if we wave that "stick" at our students that their behaviors will improve.  Yet, I have witnessed those same students who serve Friday school after Friday school after Friday school repeat the same behaviors week after week.  I have seen students who are offered candy or some other external reward finally start to complete and turn the assignments but fail them.  I've also watched students sign contracts explaining that they will be retained if they don't comply with a list of items that the teachers and administrators compile.  Those same students show no improvement but still go on to the next grade level.  I definitely see the failures in this system. Just like Daniel Pink proclaims in his talk these "if this, then that" situations will only work on a small group in an even smaller amount of scenarios.  Rewards and punishments will work beautifully on students who are already intrinsically motivated to please and excel academically.  But the age old question remains, how do we motivate the unmotivated?

I love the idea of autonomy.  I think we could create autonomy by allowing students to incorporate the "genius hour" or the "20 percent time" to show what they know.  They could work on whatever they want for  one hour a week the only condition is that they are able to prove mastery of a certain set of skills.  Project based learning is another way that students could show mastery and purpose.  They will see that it is important to pick up what we as teachers are putting down to try to solve real world problems.

The same goes for teachers.  The state of Indiana says that now if we complete this checklist of items that they say makes us highly effective teachers we will get our raises each year.  But are teachers striving to be better teachers because they want to grow professionally, or are they narrowing their focus on the "carrot" that's dangling in front of them and simply checking off those items in that rubric when they are being evaluated?  Or are teachers so fearful of losing their jobs due to the "stick" or poor evaluation that they have lost what made them love teaching in the first place.  Teachers can become so caught up in improving test scores that their classrooms become skill and drill boot camps and all creativity is left behind.

Maybe the state could be more nurturing to the creative side of teaching and use the example that Daniel Pink mentioned.  The state could allow us to come up with our own creative, nontraditional ways of improving test scores without having to worry about the "sticks" or punishment of being labeled with a poor letter grade or the fear of losing our jobs.  The state test could be one thing the students do during the school year not the one thing they are being prepared for all year long.

Daniel Pink is on to something.  He says there is a mismatch to what science says and what businesses do, but I can see that there is also a mismatch to what science says and what the world of education does.