![]() ![]() The participants selected for the study were only those children who showed a high level of interest in the activity-in other words, children who were already intrinsically motivated. Each day, when the children arrived during free play time, this was one of the many choices they had.įrom behind the one-way mirror, the researchers could measure how much time during these free play periods each of the children chose to spend with this activity as opposed to others. (Such a study, by the way, could only be done at a research school like Bing.) Over a three-week period, during the first hour of each class, the teachers put out on one particular table in front of the one-way observation mirrors a new activity-magic markers and drawing paper. So, Lepper designed a series of studies to explore these effects. There were hints in the literature of these effects, but no one had really studied them. While looking more closely at a number of these programs - some of which had gone so overboard they were simply out and out bribery - Lepper observed that while the rewards produced instant compliance, they simultaneously seemed to undermine real motivation. They would work to get rewards, but if there was nothing in it for them, then there was no reason at all to pay attention or behave or study. That, says Lepper, was the wonderful positive effect and the reason for popularity of these programs.īut, Lepper asked, what happens when these children leave school? What happens when they go to a public school or a school that doesn’t have this kind of program? In fact, when such programs were discontinued, the children sometimes got much worse. And as long as the program continued, so did the students’ behavior. ![]() The rewards were very attractive and the children shaped up instantly. ![]() Such programs produced an instant effect. Conversely, points would be taken away for bad behavior. Points could be redeemed for extra recess time or candy or even to buy your way out of tests. If kids were misbehaving, not studying enough, not learning, then the answer was, Lepper says, “good old-fashioned capitalism.” The children should be paid - with rewards, points, chips - for good behavior. Lepper, Chairman of Stanford’s Psychology Department, presented “Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Motivation, and the Process of Learning,” an overview of the research into the role rewards play in children’s learning at the annual Bing Nursery School Distinguished Lecture.Īt the time Lepper began his research, behavior modification programs were in their heyday. Lepper, of the detrimental effects of over-reliance on rewards to shape children’s behavior. The child looked around, picked up a crystal glass from the table and asked, “How many points not to drop this?” A fine example, says Dr. Until, that is, the first time the family dined at a nice restaurant. ![]() “He sits up straight and eats his peas and the Brussels sprouts and he is really very well behaved,” they reported. Some years ago, after a lecture, Professor Mark Lepper was approached by a couple who told him about a system of rewards they had set up for their son, which had produced much improved behavior at the dinner table. By Christine VanDeVelde Luskin, writer and former Bing parent ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |