The practice of using bonuses and praise to motivate students is directly associated with the principles of behaviorism. However, in his work Punished by Rewards, Alfie Kohn claims that rewards can have adverse effects on students, and the author provides many arguments against the core ideas of behaviorism in this context. According to Kohn (1993), rewards are similar to punishment, and they do not stimulate students’ intrinsic motivation.
Moreover, this practice can lead to decreasing students’ interest in some activities which were not previously associated with rewards (Kohn, 1993). The author’s claims can be viewed as controversial in the context of behaviorism and traditional practices used by teachers; therefore, it is important to critically evaluate Kohn’s arguments and proposed alternatives to using rewards with reference to real-world experiences.
To evaluate the appropriateness of Kohn’s (1993) work from theoretical and practical perspectives, it is necessary to focus on the author’s key concepts developed in the book. The main question asked by the author in his work is whether rewards can motivate students to behave or study better. Kohn’s (1993) answer to this question can be discussed as negative. The author does not agree with the principles of behaviorism and states that rewards are associated with extrinsic motivation, and they cannot be used to develop intrinsic motivation. Still, only this inner motivation should be viewed as a real driving force for people.
In order to support his position, Kohn (1993) lists five reasons why rewards can fail while being applied in classrooms. Thus, according to the author, rewards usually work as the punishment; they affect relationships between students, peers, and adults; the reference to rewards is associated with ignoring specific reasons for students’ behaviors; they are not associated with risk-taking; and they weaken people’s interest in performing tasks (Kohn, 1993).
These arguments are effectively supported by evidence and study results presented in the author’s work. While focusing on the writer’s arguments, it is possible to agree that rewards can be used by educators inappropriately, and such practices can have undesired effects on children. Furthermore, it is important to speak about a kind of manipulation associated with mismanaging the practice of rewarding students.
In addition to providing evidence to support his position and critique of behaviorists’ methods, Kohn (1993) also proposes a solution to the problem of motivating students. The author analyzes the claims usually made by his opponents, provides his counterarguments, assesses the modern system of grading, examines the roots of motivation, and concludes with his theory of the three “C’s”: collaboration, content, and choice (Kohn, 1993).
According to the writer, only the focus on collaboration between students, the accentuation of the useful content, and provision of autonomy can contribute to developing motivation in learners. These approaches are viewed as more effective to stimulate people’s creativity, risk-taking, and interest than rewards (Kohn, 1993). On the one hand, these ideas seem to be well-formulated and convincing. On the other hand, the discussion of the three “C’s” lacks evidence and facts from studies to support this approach as an alternative to using rewards. There are no specific data to support the author’s claims regarding the effectiveness of his strategy in contrast to using rewards in order to stimulate students’ intrinsic motivation.
In spite of the fact that most of Kohn’s (1993) arguments are supported by study findings mentioned by the author, his approach to discussing literature on the problem is rather controversial. The author is concentrated on the critique of behaviorism without focusing on cases when behaviorist methods can be applied effectively and without presenting data which can oppose the author’s position. Furthermore, some of the author’s arguments also lack support in spite of being viewed as reasonable. Still, Kohn’s (1993) work contributes to raising questions about the effective use of rewards and similar strategies in classrooms to develop students’ motivation by putting emphasis on the mismanagement of behaviorist approaches and by leading to the improvement of practices.
While applying the concepts presented in the book to real-world experiences, it is important to note that many examples provided by the author can be observed in classrooms. When teachers pay much attention to providing rewards for students’ good behaviors and performance instead of motivating them intrinsically, a classroom becomes a place for a continuous contest. As a result, students are focused on thinking about rewards rather than about their learning.
They can feel much pressure and perceive low grades as failures. From this point, rewards can be oriented to manipulating students’ behaviors, as well as their performance, rather than to making them focused on learning. Therefore, it is possible to expect such adverse effects as the absence of a real interest in studied topics and the concentration only on promised rewards.
The critical evaluation of Kohn’s Punished by Rewards allows for determining strengths and weaknesses in the author’s arguments. The writer pays much attention to supporting his position and making his ideas convincing. Still, he lacks evidence while proposing alternative solutions, and he does not mention any advantages associated with rewards. As a result, Kohn’s argument is rather one-sided. However, the author’s ideas are related to practice and real-life experiences. Therefore, this book can be used to improve the application of rewards to practice.
Reference
Kohn, A. (1993). Punished by rewards: The trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A’s, praise, and other bribes. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.