|
Incentive Systems in Education
Chapter 7 covers many topics. I am going to offer comments on one of these topics. Most of Chapter 7 might be described as a reinterpretation of several principles of behaviorism from a cognitive perspective. While the alternate take on behavioral principles I might present in a straight forward fashion when teaching Introductory Psychology or the undergraduate course in educational psychology is quite interesting, it is not my intention to argue the relative merits of the cognitive vs. behavioral perspectives. For the most part, my ideas about the value of various theoretical perspectives in educational psychology is quite pragmatic; i.e., it is worthwhile to consider whatever recommendations are made that appear to be beneficial in applied settings. I happen to teach this graduate course from a cognitive perspective, but this is because of my own strengths and not because I intend to discourage your interest in the behavioral perspective.
I suggest that all empirically based models of learning are of value up front because my "mini lecture" for this unit ends up presenting a perspective that is critical of a hard-core incentive system. The following content is based on some of my own recent research, but addresses a challenge that many educators should be able to identify with. In the following comments, I will attempt to differentiate my interpretation from the data. As is the case when reviewing any research-based conclusions, you should carefully consider the methodology and data to consider for yourself whether the conclusions offered are justified.
Background
I do research focused on improving the study effectiveness of novice students enrolled in large (200 students or so), introductory courses. Most of this work is focused on Introductory Psychology because I have easy access to this population. One technique I have investigated involves the use of "practice questions". Questions are an effective way to a) encourage the processing of information and b) provide a way to determine whether specific concepts are understood so that when necessary additional study activity can be allocated (metacognition).
Important challenges associated with recommended study strategies include a) how to get students to take advantage of opportunities they are offered and b) how to encourage use of such opportunities in ways that are likely to be helpful. For example, it is known that most students ignore the questions that are often inserted at the end of textbook chapters. Students also tend to make use of study techniques late in the time period between exams and the use of techniques that provide feedback are less effective when there is little time to follow up when problems are identified. This is one of the limitations when students cram.
Method
I have been investigating two strategies which may increase student involvement with the recommended study strategy; i.e., study questions. The idea is to set aside a few course points to encourage some use of the strategy and then see if students will continue use of the strategy on their own.
One treatment made use of mastery quizzes. One course point was associated with each assigned textbook chapter. Four chapters were required reading for each examination. To receive credit for this point, students had to correctly answer 7 or 10 questions available online as a quiz. There were a few other rules. Only the first quiz attempted on a given day counted in earning the course point. Quizzes completed during the last two days before an examination could not be taken to earn the point. The idea was to encourage more distributed study effort. Students could use this same system at any time to view study questions unrelated to the availability of the designated course points.
The second treatment was labelled interactive study. Again, one course point was associated with each assigned textbook chapter. To acquire this point, students had to answer twenty study questions associated with a given chapter. Twenty questions were required in an effort to approximate the number of questions participants in the mastery quiz treatment would be required to complete. Questions viewed during the final two days before an exam could not be applied to earn course points. Again, students could make as much use of this system as desired unrelated to the availability of course points.
Results
This study investigated several issues, but the topic that fits with Chapter 7 is the influence of the treatments on voluntary study behavior. Typically, college instructors do not assume they should directly reinforce study behavior. Either they assume students should study in order to master the content of a course or they assume students should study with the anticipation students will be rewarded by higher examination scores. While this research did offer incentives, the focus here is really on what students did when extrinsic incentives were not available.
Examine the following graphic. This graphic displays the number of questions attempted by the mastery (blue) and interactive study (purple) across three examinations. Our focus here is on the Extra questions. There is clearly a large treatment difference indicating that students previously exposed to the interactive study treatment voluntarily viewed far more questions than students exposed to the mastery treatment.
Discussion
One theoretical perspective that may account for these differences relates to the nature of the extrinsic reward structure that was applied while students were attempting to earn the points that were available under the two treatment conditions. You might review the assigned reading (pages 274-277) on a similar topic. Students in the mastery condition were rewarded based on the quality of their performance. Students in the interactive study condition were rewarded based on their activity. This is not a pure test of the issue described in your book. A pure test would contrast compensated engagement with voluntary engagement. However, this research does reveal a powerful consequence related to the treatment differences.
There is an interesting theoretical controversy related to the potential negative impact of extrinsic consequences (see references to Cameron vs. Lepper on page 276). One of the challenges in this literature concerns subtle differences in the research methods. One criticism of the research concluding that compensated behavior reduces the likelihood of later voluntary behavior is the observation that all participants in most of these studies tend to be compensated and this is not the typical way reinforcement works in classroom situations. Typically, classroom reward systems are related to the quality of performance and receiving the reward is not guaranteed under such circumstances. The opposing position then argues that failing to receive a compensation after expending effort is actually best described as punishment and not reinforcement. Hence, they suggest that a decline in future behavior would be expected among those not receiving a reward. While I guess these competing theoretical positions make some sense, the implications for practice based solely on such theoretical semantics are difficult to interpret. Teachers typically make a decision to implement strategy A or B.
Perhaps a more meaningful distinction is to contrast whether an extrinsic reward is related to performance or effort. This distinction allows a clear choice for instructors and the present research would suggest a short term reward system related to effort has more effective long-term consequences for continued effort than a short term reward system related to performance.
There is one more graph I would like you to examine. This graph relates voluntary questions viewed to reading ability. The top line represents the interactive study condition and the bottom line the mastery condition. This graph illustrates the data for the third examination (a similar outcome was evident for the second exam). What is interesting and disturbing about this image is the demonstration that the smallest treatment difference exists for the students most in need of help. Such observations are common and some suggest that this illustrates what some describe as learned helplessness (this concept is something like the attributional model discussed in Chapter 14).
|
