Skip to main content

Intrinsic vs. extrinsic incentives

Somewhat related to my struggle to trust my students is my interest in intrinsic versus extrinsic incentives. Economistmom wrote a post about handling her daughter's allowance, which led me to comment that when I was growing up, my mom always said that our allowances were not 'payment' for doing household chores, we were supposed to do chores simply because it was our responsibility as members of the family. Tyler Cowen makes a similar point in Discover Your Inner Economist, arguing that if you pay your kids to do stuff that it can actually be a weaker incentive than relying on their sense of familial duty. But on the other hand, the ed policy world was buzzing a few weeks ago when New York City received a prestigious award for its "Million" Campaign, in which students receive cell phones and prizes as rewards for academic achievement.

On the face of it, I wasn't thrilled when I first heard about the Million Campaign, precisely because I'm skeptical that a program that relies on extrinsic rewards can have lasting effects on student achievement. But what I find interesting (and granted, I know very little about the program) is that I have heard anecdotal stories about kids who, because of the program, begin to develop intrinsic motivation to succeed. That is, the program is targeted specifically at kids for whom academic success is not considered "cool" and so they have simply never tried very hard. When they actually start studying and learning, even though that effort begins as a way to earn extrinsic rewards, they also begin to discover that they like learning.

In my principles class, I already include a little bit of discussion with students about intrinsic versus extrinsic incentives. Given that economics as a field tends to focus on extrinsic incentives, I think it's important to remind them that sometimes the strongest incentives are those we can't measure with dollars. Freakonomics actually provides a very useful example: I have students read the chapter about sumo wrestlers and teachers both cheating (in response to monetary incentives). Invariably, students find the idea of teachers cheating to be more morally repugnant and when I ask them why, they usually come up with answers like, "teachers are supposed to care about what their students are learning" and this leads nicely into the discussion of different types of monetary and non-monetary incentives.

I'm thinking that this year, I will try to expand that discussion to my students' own motivations. Do they do certain things (like come to class or complete assignments) because of the extrinsic incentives (i.e., grades) or are they intrinsically motivated to actually learn? I'm wondering if simply having this discussion will lead students to be more intrinsically motivated...

Related posts:
Learning to trust students
It's hard to get incentives right

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Economics Education sessions at ASSA

If I missed any, please let me know... Jan 07, 2011 8:00 am , Sheraton, Director's Row H American Economic Association K-12 Economic and Financial Literacy Education (A2) Presiding: Richard MacDonald (St. Cloud State University) Teacher and Student Characteristics as Determinants of Success in High School Economics Classes Jody Hoff  (Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco) Jane Lopus (California State University-East Bay) Rob Valletta (Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco) [Download Preview] It Takes a Village: Determinants of the Efficacy of Financial Literacy Education for Elementary and Middle School Students Weiwei Chen (University of Memphis) Julie Heath (University of Memphis) Economics Understanding of Albanian High School Students: Student and Teacher Effects and Specific Concept Knowledge Dolore Bushati (University of Kansas) Barbara Phipps (University of Kansas) Lecture and Tutorial Attendance and Student Performance in t...

This is about getting through, not re-inventing your course

As someone who has worked hard to build a lot of interactivity into my courses, I have never been interested in teaching fully online courses, in part because I have felt that the level of engaged interaction could never match that of a face-to-face class (not that there aren't some exceptional online courses out there; I just have a strong preference for the in-person connection). But the current situation is not really about building online courses that are 'just as good' as our face-to-face courses; it is about getting through this particular moment without compromising our students' learning too much. So if you are used to a lot of interaction in your F2F class, here are some options for adapting that interaction for a virtual environment: [NOTE: SDSU is a Zoom/mostly Blackboard campus so that's how I've written this but I am pretty sure that other systems have similar functionality] If you use clickers in class to break up what is otherwise mostly lect...

Moving on...

I want to let everyone know that I am officially closing out this chapter of my blogging life. It was 17 years ago this May that I started this blog, back when blogging was still relatively new, and I was exploring ways to have my students do some writing. During the years from 2008 to 2015-ish, when I was most active with experimenting with different pedagogical approaches, this space helped me process what I was learning, and connected me with economists and other colleagues who care about teaching. As I have moved into other roles, I have been torn about what to do with this space, feeling a bit weird about posting anything not directly related to teaching. I have finally decided I need to start fresh so I will be writing (though I have no idea how regularly) on Substack .  Thank you to everyone who has read and commented over the years. I hope you'll find me on Substack, or in real life!