Our future leaders and citizens are continually being short-changed. The reason is that the world of education is continually using extrinsic or external motivational approaches to have students behave appropriately, act responsibly and put forth effort in their learning.
Extrinsically motivated behaviours are ones that are performed to receive some reward. Extrinsic motivation is in play when the reason for engaging in an activity is motivated by something other than the activity itself, such as doing what the teacher wants in order to receive a sticker or engaging in learning to get a good grade.
However, a much more effective approach is to prompt intrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation involves doing an activity for its own sake, such as spending time on a hobby. Intrinsically motivated behaviours are ones for which the rewards are internal to the person by bringing satisfaction and joy from the activity itself.
Let’s examine the difference between the two approaches. If a student picked up some trash on the school grounds because of serving detention, that act would be extrinsically motivated; however, if the person took the initiative to pick up some trash without being prodded or asked, the motivation would be intrinsic. Notice that in both cases the trash would be picked up. However, the desired goal would be different. In the extrinsic case, it would be obedience, whereas in the intrinsic case it would be taking the initiative to be responsible simply because it would be the right thing to do.
Using external motivations infers that what the teacher wants is not good enough for its own sake and bribery is therefore necessary. Without even realising it, this approach is teaching values that sustain immaturity, rather than values that produce responsible, successful adults. The assumption or hope of course is that when youth become older, these external approaches will transfer to internal motivation. They don’t! Instead, they encourage narcissism, as in, “What will I get if I do what you want me to do?”
A very important difference between the two types of motivation concerns building characteristics and values such as integrity, kindness, generosity, caring, perseverance and responsibility. These cannot be mandated. They require intrinsic motivation or, as I prefer, internal motivation because characteristics such as responsibility are not naturally intrinsic to many people.
We can promote these types of characteristics by teaching young people that they continually choose how they act, what they say, how they say it, what to focus on, when to go along with others, when to resist, what they say about others and most importantly, what they say to themselves about themselves. This concept of self-talk is gaining more attention in educational, psychological and medical spheres.
If you are not familiar with the opening of my education book, allow me to share it with you here:
Life is a conversation. Interestingly, the most influential person we talk with all day is ourself, and what we tell ourself has a direct bearing on our behaviour, our performance, and our influence on others. In fact, a good case can be made that our self-talk creates our reality.
So many practices currently used in schools lack the characteristics so necessary for promoting responsibility and positive self- talk. Current practices aim at obedience, but obedience does not create desire. This is especially the case when relying on rules. Without realising it, when a rule is broken the teacher often becomes a policeman whose job it is to enforce rules. Teachers enter the profession to be a facilitator of learning, a role model, a coach – not to become a cop engaging in adversarial relationships. Using the term “Responsibilities” and teaching procedures is so much more effective than relying on rules. The proof is that if a procedure is not followed, the automatic response is to re- teach the procedure, rather than to punish. For a 3-minute video on this issue, go to MarvinMarshall.com.
The research shows concrete evidence that extrinsic rewards used as incentives can have a deleterious effect on intrinsic motivation as it pertains to learning. An activity dependent on the reward decreases self-determination. In addition, it should be rather obvious that intrinsic motivation also underlies creativity.
A major point regarding the use of external approaches is made dramatically clear by the classic story of an old man.
An elder
ly gentleman spent each afternoon tending his large garden on his corner lot. A group of ten-year-olds began harassing him on their way home from school. After a few days listening to their jeers and insults, he decided to act.
The following day he met the boys as they approached his house. The gentleman told the youths that he lived alone and was enjoying the attention they were giving him. To show his appreciation, he told them if they continued showing him attention on the next day he would give them each a dollar. The next day they showed up right after school. They showered the elderly man with epithets and jeers. True to his word, the man put down his gardening tools, walked up to them, and pulled out a roll of bills from his pocket. He handed each boy a dollar and encouraged a repeat the next day, telling them that if they did, he would give them each a quarter of a dollar. The boys thought that it was pretty good and came back the next day to taunt him.
The next day at the first catcall, the elderly gentleman walked over with a roll of quarters and again paid off his hecklers. He then announced that in the future he would only give them a penny.
Do you think the boys came back? The sly gentleman’s plan was elegantly simple. He rewarded the boys and thereby changed their motivation from harassing him for the fun of it to getting the reward. When a meaningful reward was gone, so were they.
You cannot get around the simple fact that once a reward is successfully used as an incentive, the motivation for a similar future act cannot be accurately determined – that is, between engaging in an activity to get the reward or engaging in the activity because it is the right thing to do. The reason is simple. Rewarding changes motivation. Please note that awarding after an act is an acknowledgment, not a bribe.
In a “behaviourist” approach, all behaviours are said tobe under the control of some reinforcement contingency. The idea here is to reinforce what you want. A major problem in schools, however, is that if the teacher ignores inappropriate behaviour,
that behaviour is being reinforced simply by the fact that it is ignored. The automatic assumption from a student is that if nothing happens then it’s okay to do it again.
The most influential proponent of external motivation whose theory is used in education was B. F. Skinner, the Harvard University psychologist who worked with pigeons and rodents to reinforce desired behaviour. His theory of using external reinforcement for what a teacher wants can be observed today in Positive Behavioural Intervention and Supports (PBIS) that is proudly promoted in the U.S. Teachers look for good behaviour and then reinforce the desired behaviour by giving some reward.
Tom Sawyer was a better psychologist than B.F. Skinner. Tom inspired others to whitewash Aunt Polly’s nine-feet high, 30-yards-long fence. Here is how he did it.
On the Saturday morning that Tom was engaged in the project, Ben was on his way to the swimming pond and commented to Tom, “What a shame you have to work on Saturday.”
Tom replied, “This is not work. Work is something you are obliged to do. Besides, I don’t think there may be one, maybe two in a thousand who can do the work the way Aunt Polly wants it done. She’s not too concerned about her back fence, but the front fence is something she is very particular about.”
Ben asked, “Can I try it?”
Tom replied, “I don’t know. I’m not sure Aunt Polly would like it.”
Ben pleaded, “Please!”
“Well,” said Tom, “What do you have?” Ben pulled out a frog and gave it to Tom.
Tom pulled the same tactic on the next dozen boys who were on their way to the swimming pond. Soon enough, there were a dozen boys whitewashing Aunt Polly’s front fence while Tom was eating an apple and counting his loot under a nearby tree.
How did he do it? He enticed the boys by having them WANT to be engaged in the project. He knew what super salespeople know, namely, the best way to influence someone is to induce the person to influence himself.
In contrast to Tom Sawyer’s approach, behaviourists believe that all behaviours are acquired through conditioning. They rely on external sources to actuate change. They completely neglect the internal, which is a prime reason that neuroscientists do not rely on these approaches for humans.
Most classroom teachers do not realise that they are in the motivation profession. Learning cannot be forced. Successful teachers realise that they need to motivate students to learn.
Unfortunately, a carrot and stick approach – used to train rodents, birds, and animals – is employed in much of today’s education. Although behaviourism is touted for special education students who are given tangibles to reinforce desired behaviours, this approach is often used now (and in some cases mandated) for all students, as with PBIS.
Although external sources can control, they cannot change people. People change themselves, and the most effective approach is to have people WANT to do what you would like to have them do. Dwight D. Eisenhower, 34th President of the United States and previously Supreme Commander of Allied Forces during WWII, said, “Motivation is the art of getting people to do what you want them to do because they want to do it.”
Most teachers use external approaches because they simply do not know how to tap into intrinsic motivation. “Discipline without Stress” at www.MarvinMarshall. com shows how to have students WANT to learn what teachers teach.