« Is it Really That Tempting to Sign Up For New Credit Cards? | Main | Should Doctors Be Paid to Prescribe Generic Drugs? »
Paying Kids to Study – Does it Send the Wrong Message?
By JLP | January 23, 2008
According to this article, a county in Georgia is going to pay kids to study:
Fulton County school officials have a new program to encourage selected students to study after school: cold, hard cash.
The Fulton school system is instituting “Learn & Earn,” offering 40 students from Creekside High and Bear Creek Middle schools in Fairburn $8 an hour to study after school. The privately funded program will also offer cash bonuses to students who improve in-school performance.
My negative reaction to this makes me wonder if my wife and I should be rewarding our boys for making good grades. We currently pay them $20 if they bring home all A’s on their report card. It’s an all or nothing deal – they either get all A’s and the $20 or they don’t.
Are we sending our boys the wrong message? Part of me says “maybe” and part of me says it’s okay. I’m torn.
Back to the story…
I do think this sends the wrong message. Why? Because these kids are getting paid to do the bare minimum of just studying. In addition to their $8 per hour, they can also earn bonuses if their grades improve. I would rather them structure it so that they ONLY get paid if their grades improve.
Thoughts? Let’s get a discussion going. I really want to know your thoughts.
Topics: Kids and Money | 32 Comments »
January 23rd, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Are they crazy? Does that mean that, as parents, we will ultimately be forced to pay our children to study? That’s a little extreme, but what happens when those same students come home at night and refuse to study while at home because their parents aren’t paying them $8 per hour to do so? I don’t think this is a good idea. I do, however, agree with the $20 for all A’s scenario.
January 23rd, 2008 at 4:01 pm
This public program is a bad idea for lots of reasons.
1. You shouldn’t get paid for doing things that are expected of you anyway. It’s like getting paid to be nice to your brother or getting paid to do chores around the house or getting paid to GO to school. It sends the message that studying and making good grades is so far above and beyond what’s expected of you that we’re going to pay you to do it.
2. It is ridiculous to try to pay by the hour for studying. All that will do is ensure it takes me hours and hours to get my HW done. Plus it’ll encourage big groups of kids to show up at the study hall–which will be distracting for anyone actually studying and cost even more money b/c then you’ll have to pay lots of teachers overtime to supervise.
3. The smart motivated kids who would have good grades no matter what get a nice bonus (courtesy of taxpayer dollars that could be going elsewhere) for doing nothing different. The not-so-smart, disadvantaged, or unmotivated slackers will probably still not improve, and the $$ system will only make them feel worse about themselves.
4. All this is going to do is encourage cheating!!
January 23rd, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Oh, but I do agree that going above and beyond expectations can and should be appropriately rewarded by parents with financial incentives. Making straight A’s is an example of that. EXTRA chores that would otherwise not be expected is another example.
There is NO place for monetary rewards in school, however, no matter how great any student’s acheivement. What ever happened to motivations like recognition, non-motetary awards, and being able to put your accomplishments on your college resume?
January 23rd, 2008 at 4:23 pm
If they only get paid if their grades improve, kids will start out doing very badly on purpose and then pull it up to their average grades.
The problem lies in paying kids to study – if you really teach your kids why studying is important, they will do it themselves.
January 23rd, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Esmond,
I’m pretty sure the problems lies in the fact these kids’ parents are not involved in their studies. The district wants the kids to have better grades so they’re trying this program to see if it works.
January 23rd, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Wow JLP, you’re gripping about the lazy younger generation. Let’s make it official..you’re OLD
January 23rd, 2008 at 4:38 pm
It definitely sends the wrong message and in the long wrong may be counter productive. Ultimately kids need to learn to do well for the joy of doing well. I would have made a killing if I had been paid for my grades. I also don’t think I would have done as well if the motivation was external rather than internal. I got the grades because they were important to me.
With my kids, I do reward merit. I don’t pay for it with direct cash.
My son loves to eat, so good grades means he gets to eat hot school lunches rather than scramble in the morning to pack one. If his grades slip, its peanut butter and jelly.
Some will say this is the flip side of the the same coin. I accept that. I just think that a privilege earned is better than paying a child with cash for a job he should be doing in the first place.
January 23rd, 2008 at 4:59 pm
I think it’s hard to argue that incentives like these won’t work well. They will. Paying kids will study will almost certainly improve their performance. But I agree that this isn’t the best way to do it. As noted, paying by the hour is inefficient. It’s much better to pay “piece rates” (this is true in all work). And paying for improvement is also a bad idea because it encourages everyone to try poorly at first and then make incremental improvements. Kids are smart.
For example, you could pay $x per homework plus a bonus for high grades (A or B). That encourages everyone to do it, but also encourages them to do well.
January 23rd, 2008 at 5:01 pm
The usual line probably applies – if you reward people for X as a proxy for Y they will do X but there’s no other guarantees. You’re right that paying for results would probably be more effective.
This also reminds me the book Discover Your Inner Economist, which has a section about household chores and similar things like getting students not to litter at school. I believe the conclusion was that telling people they’re doing a good job encourages them more than paying them – because it’s positive reinforcement and it doesn’t turn it into a “job” when they should be doing it anyways.
That said I don’t think it’s a good idea to rely on kids studying for the joy of doing well in school
Personally I didn’t take high school & earlier that seriously and I don’t see anything short of completely changing the structure that would have changed my mind.
January 23rd, 2008 at 5:22 pm
I think it’s a neat concept to experiment with. My thinking is, it’s the way the world works anyways, so why not give it a shot and see what the results is. The way it is currently, there is a vast contrast between life during “the school years” and life in the real world. It’s probably why there seems to be so many kids who end up in college till their 28 spending half of it in Europe trying to find themselves and exploring their artistic (in)abilities. After school, the world doesn’t operate on praise, warm fuzzy feelings, and care about self-esteem… it runs on cold hard cash. If this program was coupled with a financial education program in which the students could learn to manage the money earned, I think it would give them quite an edge.
January 23rd, 2008 at 6:04 pm
My parents would take us out for a special lunch or dinner when report cards came out. I don’t know what they would have done if we didn’t get A’s…because we did.
January 23rd, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Doesn’t this school district have a psychologist?!?
Anyone with a basic grasp of first semester psychology knows the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. I can point to a hundred social psychology studies that show extrinsic ‘motivators’ (e.g. paying to study or paying for all A’s) actually destroy intrinsic motivation.
The same principal holds true for incentive pay and similar programs.
Programs like these will finally kill the little that’s left of kids’ desire to learn.
JLP, if you’re interested I can point you toward literature on this.
January 23rd, 2008 at 6:49 pm
I don’t think students should be paid money for what they are supposed to be doing, which is their best. The reward should be apparent and appreciated for its inherent worth. If there is no inherent worth in studying, why do it? To get paid? OK, maybe there’s a point to that. Like many jobs. There should be great reward in the doing itself. Love of learning is important, as well.
January 23rd, 2008 at 10:47 pm
I got paid for each A and it’s probably what I’ll do with my kids – it’s kind of like “the real world” when they’re working. Working hard and doing more than the minimum will earn them bonuses, raises, etc.
And I don’t like the “all or nothing” approach because I don’t think it takes each child’s talents/skills/interests into account. I worked my butt off in Physics and could only manage a B or C at best – we’re talking almost 20 years later and I still remember how much effort I put into that class, only to continue struggling. And I got a B or C in Calculus because it didn’t really “click” for me until the AP test, which for some reason I managed to ace (it was the easier Calc test, though). And yet I just had to show up to Spanish class in order to get an A, it was just easy for me.
Hm, maybe I’ll have to rethink my reward system. I’d rather reward my child’s effort than the grade itself.
January 24th, 2008 at 8:23 am
Heck yes, you should pay your kids to get good grades, and here’s why: It’s realistic. If I get a good performance report at work, I’ll be paid more. Same thing with kids…they’ll learn to perform!
January 24th, 2008 at 9:12 am
This is the best, most progressive idea I’ve ever heard of being implemented by a public school system.
Make no mistake, this program is not to line the pockets of kids who are already doing well. Chances are high that the program is being implemented in poor schools, inner city schools, schools facing Title 1 status under No Child Left Behind, etc.
This is about the achievement gap. Poor kids (disproportionately represented by minorities) often have poor, uneducated parents who do not (or can not) help with schoolwork. On top of that, there are environmental problems like high crime and family problems.
What will this do? If poor parents are told about this program, you can bet that they will suddenly be a little more motivated to make sure their kids are in school in that program, actually studying (to get the further improvement bonus). That will put pressure on the kids (which sounds sad, but is drastically needed). That’s going to be the most important outcome of this program, I think.
Even the idea of bonuses for good grades is much weaker than this program. Parents (I’m talking about bad parents) aren’t going to spend several hours per week checking their kids’ homework or even making sure they get on the bus, just for the far-off goal of a $100 reward at the end of the year. Also, the first bombed test will put the reward out of reach, after which there’s no further motivation. But if they know that making their children sit in this study program will bring home $8/hour per child TODAY… that’s tangible. And achievable! And it doesn’t matter if they fail the first test, they still get $8/hour, so you won’t have a massive reduction in participation at the first setback.
And eventually that will have an effect on the children. You can’t study for 1 or 2 hours a day for 6 months and not learn anything. Let’s be honest, you cannot expect a majority of D and F students to become A students over the course of a few months, but with persistence you could make them into C students. That’s a HUGE step.
It will also teach kids that there are ways they can make money and fit in with society. You don’t have to be involved in crime. You don’t have to “know someone” or “be lucky” to get out of your environment.
This is an exciting subject for me because currently the “achievement gap” is a major local political issue where I live. There are two public schools literally right next to each other that have enormous differences in achievement. The reason is that one is a year-round school, which apparently is favored by middle-to-high income families (who can afford care and activities for their children during the regular gaps). The poor families in the failing traditional-calendar school are encouraged to transfer, but they refuse.
To give you an idea of the income disparity, around 60% of the children in the traditional-calendar school are enrolled in the free-and-reduced lunch program offered for low income families, whereas in the year-round school only about 15% of the students are.
I can imagine what difference an $8/hour “study job” would have for students in the traditional-calendar school.
January 24th, 2008 at 9:17 am
Oh, and I also wanted to comment on the cost of the program. Paying $8/hour to 100 students per school for an hour or two a day is peanuts compared to the cost of, well, just about ANYTHING related to public education. Untold billions are spent every year just by the Federal government to assist under-performing schools, and the programs generally have little or no long-term impact.
January 24th, 2008 at 9:20 am
I feel that they shouldn’t be paid for what is expected of them. Paying kids to study is not going to promote any good habits. If they had to be paid in order to study in high school, how many are going to go into college expecting the same thing (granted those that need to be paid to study probably shouldn’t be making this step yet). Rewarding performance is a better motivator, though perhaps before a bonus is recieved, a mandatory effort would be necessary. Offer to pay for good grades $20 for all A’s lose $5 for any B’s and so on but only if xx hours are logged in extra study.
Yes people will work to achieve the bare minimum of study hours just to hope for a bonus, but it also forces those who find school easy to have to put in some effort.
I was always graded on a 100 point basis and my parents offered to reward/penalize me based on my quaterly averages. For every point I earned above a 90 I received $10 and for every point below 90 I had to pay back $10. After the first quarter of this they quickly put in a $100 cap since I rarely had grades below 90 (well gym, religion, and history were always a problem for me). The only failing my parents had in this system is that my sister (she was also involved in the same system) occasionally had a balance due that my parents would never collect.
January 24th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Brooke, do you do your best at work in order to get a good performance report and a raise? I’ll bet not. I’ll bet you do your best because you take pride in your work or other similar reasons.
Let me put it another way. If you were not given a performance report at all, would you do a crappier job? I doubt it. You’d probably still do your best.
Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
January 24th, 2008 at 9:54 am
KMC,
What do you suggest in the situation that the kids do not have intrinsic motivation, and neither do their parents?
I think the theory in this program is that if the kids start doing better (for any reason), they will build their own motivation as they start to see the possibilities of doing well in life.
January 24th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
I certainly don’t think there’s anything wrong with your $20 for all As program. After all, much of the working world is “incentivized”, and people are paid bonuses or other perks based on performance.
January 24th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
@ Jon -
Q: “What do you suggest in the situation that the kids do not have intrinsic motivation, and neither do their parents?”
A: I suggest your teachers start doing there jobs. Parents’ motivation in this situation is irrelevant.
“I think the theory in this program is that if the kids start doing better (for any reason), they will build their own motivation as they start to see the possibilities of doing well in life.”
One, time spent studying and doing homework does not equal ‘doing better.’ Two, extrinsic rewards DESTROY instrinsic motivation. It’s been shown time and time again.
January 24th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
In Baltimore, they are floating the idea to pay kids to pass their graduation exams when they retake them. Why? Because Baltimore will still graduate them even if they fail. When was the last time someone was denied a diploma for failing high school?
The stupidity of this proposal is so obvious, yet all the pols are pushing it. It will be a great money-maker for the smart kids. They’ll just fail the test as many times as they can to maximize their take, then pass the test. I suppose the pols will try to limit who gets the money based on GPA, but paying people to excel when being successful is its own reward is a terrible idea.
January 25th, 2008 at 1:01 am
Why not, I think it is a master minded idea. Because you would not be able to take what they learned from them. I know the pride that these students will have knowing that they can do it well be money well spent and I think even after they stop paying these kids once they’re grades are up they will not fall they will continue to make the grade due to them discovering they can be as smart as anyone else they just need the guide and proof. I have a teen I know. great Idea guy no one should ever say something bad about anyone helping the youth your either part of the problem are part of the solution and atleast this guy is trying and not just talking koodoos Mr. koodoos again great idea get the kids attention and what better way than to do it but with money ITS THE AMERICAN WAY. hint this war
January 25th, 2008 at 1:10 am
Again I say either you are part of the problem or part of the solution. Americans are about the sillest so if they kids are not doing it willings then should we just sit back for another 5 years and wait on the parents and teachers and who ever else get real. Stop hating and be glade that someone is doing something to help the problem its a positive thing.
January 25th, 2008 at 1:21 am
Last comment and I am done I live in Maryland in Howard county Ellicott city to be exact and the schools are so laid back they have so many programs and help for the kids the teachers and staff seem so understanding its like they are still young enough and have kids so they are more understanding about these kids behavior because they have these problems at home. I mean help on every level. My son in the 10th grade gets to begin his career of choice and gets to see first hand a peek into his future as an engineer because it will be part of his curriculum pre engineering classes. How great is that now he want have to wait until he graduates to start on his future because they have provided a way for him to start on his future now while he is in school and I have decided to pay him to study 8$ per 2hrs of study time, great idea. babyfat102002@yahoo.
January 25th, 2008 at 8:16 am
KMC,
That’s a very egalitarian and idealistic (if somewhat glib) statement and in principle I agree with you 100%. In certain controlled circumstances I think you would be correct. However, I’m also a realist so let me point a few things out in a similarly sarcastic and dismissive manner to your own.
Q: “How do teachers instill intrinsic motivation in children they only see for 1 class period per day when the parents don’t help at all?”
A: They don’t.
Q: “Is the motivation of parents, the biggest influencing factor in a child’s life, really irrelevant?”
A: No, that’s absurd.
Q: “Is it hard to understand that on average, a child who studies for 1 hour a day will do better academically than if the child doesn’t study at all?”
A: No, that’s a simple concept that shouldn’t have to be explained.
I agree with you that intrinsic motivation is critical to build for long-term success. The problem is you can’t just wave your magic wand and fix it. There’s also no agreed upon, scientific theory of how to build intrinsic motivation, so don’t pretend that all we need to do is “make teachers do their jobs.”
Finally, you are incorrectly assuming that money is the ultimate reward here, and that going to this study session is the ultimate behavioral goal. If during that extra hour of exposure the kids can be taught to study on their own, and that studying has intrinsic rewards, then something has been achieved. When the money stops, they will obviously stop going to the study session (the extrinsically motivated behavior), but that does not mean they will no longer see the value in studying on their own (new intrinsic motivation).
January 25th, 2008 at 10:30 am
My dad would pay me based on grades A – $10, B – $5, C – $0, D and F – no money for any grades. I made A’s and B’s already so it didn’t really encourage me to study harder. It was just an extra bonus and spending money.
January 25th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
This is nuts. They get already when they graduate. The one who do study get the better high paying jobs so they already get paid to study.
January 31st, 2008 at 8:48 am
Not so keen on the idea myself. Though a few years back (quite a few actually) I read an article about a McDonald’s in WA state that was paying their student employees to study for an hour on each shift they were scheduled for. Not sure if it was in response to parents complaining that with the job their kids didn’t have time to study or if it was a pre-emptive thing. Doubt it still exists but I thought it was a cool idea.
September 10th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Hi! I was surfing and found your blog post… nice! I love your blog.
Cheers! Sandra. R.
September 11th, 2009 at 10:53 am
Sign: umsun Hello!!! rcuwwymhyw and 4151ssgfhphzye and 3330I love your blog.
I just came across your blog.