Should schools offer students incentives for academic performance?

The incentive already exists for students to excell- it's called College.

As a teacher, I use positive behavior management; I give an intrinsic or extrinsic reward to reinforce exhibiting the correct behavior. Unfortunately, many students don't have the opportunity to see adults modeling that behavior. Instead of punishing their mistakes, I reward their success, hoping that they begin to make the correct decisions on their own. I don't see how a monetary reward for a good academic performance is that different. If offering incentives reinforce behavior that accomplishes our goal, what's the harm? It is the way of today's world. My son attended a small non-public High School that gave a monetary reward for attendence. The population of the school wasn't known for showing up at school; if they aren't in school they can't be taught. The $ incentive reinforced their good attendance. When dealing with educating students that are at-risk, I will do anything I (legally) can to get them to learn!

Not a chance. Instead of spending money on incentives, spend your money on better teaching. Don't give me this "Oh, well you aren't there." You're right, I'm not. It doesn't matter where I'm at, an iPod for passing the test? What happens when they pass? Why should they pass the next one? That's a horrible misuse of funds. If that's what your district is spending money on, then its no wonder your kids aren't passing.

From my perspective, the message has been communicated quite clearly that the higher one achieves academically, the greater the potential to be rewarded in terms of career advancement and financial independence. What isn't communicated quite as clearly is the correlation between academic achievment, subsequent career advancement, financial independence, etc. and the potential to make a greater contribution to strengthening communities on both a local and global level. Since $100 was the sum identified as the amount of an incentive given to a student who aces an exam, let's look at another way that $100, tied to a student's academic achievment could be utilized in such a way to make a more positive, lasting impact on not only the student and the school but the community as well. One hundred dollars would go a long way with the organization Kiva.org, a website dedicated to helping entrepeneurs in developing countries to escape poverty by providing them no interest loans to fund businesses, projects or to cover or defray educational costs. The loans can be as low as $25, and have a 90%+ repayment rate. I came across the profile of a woman named Diana Yonso, from Guayaquil, Ecuador who was seeking a loan of $375 to convert the lower section of her house into a more formal store in order to continue her efforts to build a business selling chicken, beef, pork and sausages. The business began six months ago when her husband gave her $80 to get started. The loan had been partially funded by othe Kiva.org supporters and the remaining balance to complete the loan was $225. I put up the remainder of the money so that Diana would be able to get started sooner rather than later and part of the joy I felt in making that happen was knowing that I had made a direct impact on someone's life. When I completed the transaction and saw the updated loan profile which went from 30% to 100% funded, I couldn't stop smiling. I envisioned her reaction when she found out she had received the money and quite honestly, it made me feel good to have the opportunity to do something positive for someone in what I hope is a lasting and meaningful way. Rather than present the equation: individual achievment = individual reward, why not consider individual achievement = individual reward + the ability to help other individuals achieve?

What a joke on education! If that is what it takes to be successful, obvisouly your school district has a warped sense of hard work and success.

I work in a school in the UK that uses that gives cash to students as an incentive to pass their GCSEs (Final exams at 16). All students are given targets for each subject. We then give them £10 for every one they hit and a further £10 for every grade above they achieve target. Although I'm Vice Principal, I loathe the scheme. Apart from the obvious argument that it takes away the intrisic value of learning and demeans/devalues the whole school process, the students don't even think about the incentive until after the exam. I can go up to any student in the school and ask them to what extent it is influencing them in their revision and I can guarantee not one will answer in the positive. I should mention that we don't pay for this, it is a local govenment funded community initiative, which is meant to encourage young people to continue in education. "only if we're paid" cry the students!!

As early as possible in the education game students must know that they are responsible for their own learning. Once this is accomplished, rewards come through the joy of learning and learning how to learn. Monetary rewards would only be useful to a school in the case of standardized assessments to satisfy the adequate yearly progress mandates of NCLB. Why in this case? Because these tests have nothing to do with learning and are necessary only to measure proficiency levels at certain grade levels and to punish schools and districts that come up short; they do not pay an iota of attetion to the individual student. What a novel and ludicrous notion!

I teach in a 9-12 high school in south central Kansas. Most of our students are on free and reduced food programs. I would estimate that perhaps 3% of our total student population wants to learn anything and are willing to do what it takes to get there. They don't have a reason to learn. They are trying to survive, plain and simple. All the poverty-based information out there rings clear here. Perhaps if we could give them real incentives to learn, and not just time off for good grades, like enrichment programs, we'd have a chance.

The idea of the question is nonsense, the question itself begs to be asked. Students understand, because we tell them enough times, that school will have something to do with their future fortunes. That said, when we get to intrinsic or extrinsic concepts a point is missing. We do not permit internal values to be produced in young people. We teach to an academic cause, when many of our students could care less about academics. We have stopped offering all vocational, manual and many technical arts in our schools. Then we mandate attendance at cram schools. Get it?! The idea doesn't register until we begin to ask what is important in child rearing, and what role do we want to have the school play as an adjunct to child rearing. Right now we are too many things to too many people, and now you are talking about being an allowance giver to--just amaze me edutopia.

Some incentives are okay - for example our school (K-6) rewards students who have at least a 70% in all subjects, have 70% of their homework turned in, and have not had behavioral problems. First quarter we had a movie party and second quarter we took them roller-skating. Neither incentive was a "big" prize but it did reward those students who were doing their job. We also don't punish students who struggle in one subject but are doing their best work. This type of incentive was already established when I came to my school. I probably wouldn't have advocated for it when it was started -but I don't mind it. I do not agree with ipods or cash type incentives especially for passing tests. Granted it's hard to motivate many students but in a "give me world" things like wanting to pass a test has to come from a personal drive. Students have to want to pass because they know the importance of understanding the information and how it will affect their future. It takes a large group of people to instill this in students including PARENTS, all teachers (k-12), and the community. So until all these people have the same goal in mind, some/many students will still have the "Gimmes".