Below, I have linked a Ted Talk along with its transcript.
It is 18 minutes and 36 seconds in length, and I promise it is worth the time. Dan
Pink, the author of Drive, discusses
the science behind motivation, and more specifically the crucial differences
between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation.
While he connects his talk specifically to the business
world, the applications to the school environment are clear. As we look towards
the future of Auburn High School, and as we consider how best to motivate our
students who are truly disengaged, I think it is important that we consider
what scientists have discovered. As Pink explains in his speech:
Now I want to
tell you about an experiment using the candle problem, done by a scientist named Sam Glucksberg, who is now at Princeton University in the U.S. This shows the power of incentives. Here's what he did. He gathered his participants. And he said, “I'm going to time you. How quickly you can
solve this problem” To one group
he said, “I'm going to
time you to establish norms, averages for how long it typically takes someone to solve this sort of problem.”
To the second
group he offered rewards. He said, “If you're in
the top 25 percent of the fastest times, you get five dollars. If you're the fastest of everyone we're testing here
today, you get 20
dollars."
Now this is
several years ago. Adjusted for inflation, it's a decent sum of money for a few minutes of work. It's a nice motivator.
The simplest and
quickest way to try and solve the dilemma of engagement is by rewarding
compliance and punishing noncompliance. Easily done – too bad science has shown
time and again that this stifles creativity and only works when applied to
repetitive tasks. It is much more complicated and time intensive to try and
create a solution that gets to the heart of intrinsic motivation, but according
to “what science knows,” it is the only way to truly get results.
I would love to
hear some thoughts on this, some ideas, some questions, and some frustrations. Link to the Ted Talk: http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation/transcript?language=en
Wow...a lot to think about-I had to process this for a while to consider how to reply. As a teacher who fully embraces concept of education, I am often baffled by students who really don't care about getting A's as this was a driving factor for me. Yet, I recognize that for some "playing school" is just not in their interest or is not a priority due to things, like poverty, that are out of their control. I had to think about my current professional experience to see a connection that I can relate this to. I have a topic that I really love, the causes of the Civil War. I rear (and read) about this topic and continuously adjust my lessons, presentations, etc. as I am driven by my own interest. I could easily "settle" for what I have as it meets what I think are the student outcomes and standards; however, as it is something I care about, I keep improving. Allowing students choice in a topic they care about and the medium in which to present their learning outcome can help them unleash their potential by not confining them to a set expectation or by expecting them to settle for what grade dictates.
ReplyDelete"Allowing students choice in a topic they care about and the medium in which to present their learning outcome can help them unleash their potential by not confining them to a set expectation or by expecting them to settle for what grade dictates."
DeleteI love this, but how do we go about the nuts and bolts of doing this while still meeting the requirements of the standards?
I wasn’t intrinsically motivated until I got to college, so I “get” that kid in class that does just enough to skate by with a grade that will keep parents off her back. I try to think of that kid—myself—when I develop things for the classroom. What would have engaged me despite my apathy? A connection with the teacher is the first thing that pops into my mind. In high school, if I had a relationship with a teacher, I did better in that class because I cared about what that teacher thought of me and because I wanted to maintain that good relationship. I was apathetic in high school because my parents were divorcing, so if a teacher created an environment that let me leave those home-worries at the door, I was more ready to learn in that class than in any other. I remember the high school lessons that allowed me to become completely immersed in learning: the wax museum and campaign portfolio in World History, the Mole project in Chemistry, the songs we wrote in Spanish class, and of course anything I did in show choir or theatre. I loved it when a teacher built a world around students and the lesson and let us explore it, live in it, soak it up. And, of course, follow-through is the clincher. If a teacher let me slide, I would. That’s the exasperating thing about unmotivated high school kids—we don’t have the stuff inside to motivate ourselves at that moment in our lives, so we really need a good community of adults who can advocate for us. The kids I’m thinking of are the ones being beaten down by life in ways that no teacher can stop; but we can give them a break from it for 96 minutes a day, and if we do, it’s more likely they can learn in our classes.
ReplyDelete"The kids I’m thinking of are the ones being beaten down by life in ways that no teacher can stop; but we can give them a break from it for 96 minutes a day..."
DeleteWhen you talk about a break, I wonder what you are envisioning. How do we make school the safest place in the world to these kids, and how do we make each classroom feel like home. I was also a very unmotivated student when I was in college. I was directionless, and immature - but I would high A's in the classes where I cared what the teacher thought about me. I think if we can forge relationships like that, then we are on our way to winning the battle.
To me the break is that they are allowed to be however they are (smart, scared, lazy, shy, etc) but we are there to help them discover how to learn as best they can. I want to help them be self-motivated and that usually leads to a lot of cheerleading on my part, talking about smart I know they are, and encouraging actual physical movement around the room. If they don't understand Caesar, then how do they start the process so they will eventually get it? I don't want them to sit at their desk quietly embarrassed because they don't get the connection or point of a passage or exercise. It's ok to ask goofy questions or to be wrong as long as you are sincerely trying to get to the answer. I try to think of it as teaching them to be problem solvers, not just little robots. I want their 96 min "break" to be that they can come in and think and debate or ponder without worry about being judged harshly. I also try very hard to trust them. I feel like if I give them a little trust, then they will trust me more.
DeleteChristy you do a great job of encouraging movement in the room - I love how you use Reader's Theater. I like the emphasis in your paragraph about creating a safe environment for questioning. I think it is key that we prevent students from mocking each other, or even themselves, when they are struggling. And that is a real struggle at this level because kids (and adults!) are just so sarcastic.
Delete