Why paying kids to get good grades is a bad idea, Part II

In response to my post yesterday about why it’s a bad idea for schools to pay kids to get good grades, a commenter named yeah man raised a great point. He wrote:

If the social norms in place were working there would have been no need for this program in the first place.

This morning I was reading the October issue of the Journal of Consumer Research, and one of the studies made me realize what I wanted to say about that. So thank you, Noah Goldstein of the University of Chicago, Robert Cialdini of Arizona State University, and Vladas Griskevicius of the University of Minnesota.

I’m going to quote from the press release because it summarizes things so nicely:

In the study, researchers set out to boost participation in the towel re-use program of a major hotel chain. The hotel’s manager and staff allowed the researchers to create a series of different towel re-use cards, which were placed in the hotel’s bathrooms. Some cards read “Help Save the Environment” and others read “Join Your Fellow Guests in Helping to Save the Environment.” Both provided information on how resources are preserved when guests re-use towels. Room attendants recorded reuse rates. Cards that focused on the level of participation of other guests, which essentially conveyed that it is normal to participate, increased the percentage of participation from 35.1 percent to 44.1 percent.

In a second study, the researchers were able to boost towel re-use even further by placing a sign in the room that said 75 percent of guests in that specific room re-used their towels.

“The results of our studies have clear implications for marketers, managers, and policymakers,” write the authors. “It is worth noting that the normative messages, which were messages that we have never seen utilized by hotel chains, fared significantly better at spurring participation in the hotel’s environmental conservation program than did the type of message most commonly utilized by hotel chains—messages that focus on the importance of environmental protection.”

In other words, certain social norms get you more mileage than others. If the social norms that push kids to succeed at school aren’t working, why not try to engineer better social norms instead of running to market norms, which, as I pointed out yesterday, can really screw things up in the long run?

What would happen if when a kid sat down to do his homework the first thing he saw at the top of the worksheet was a sentence that said: “Last year, kids in Ms. Collins’s class spent 20 minutes on average doing this assignment”? Would that kid then take more time to do his homework—and actually learn something—instead of rushing through in five minutes?

I don’t know. But I would think if the National Math and Science Initiative has enough money to run around handing out $13 million grants to pay kids to study, they’d be able to come up with some funding for that experiment, too.

Barbara!

Related Topics: Economy & Policy
  • Latest on Business

    Associated Press

    Apple CEO Cook Gives Up $75M in Stock Dividends

    NEW YORK — Apple CEO Tim Cook is giving up $75 million in dividends on restricted stock that the company is awarding to all of its employees.

    In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Thursday, Apple Inc. said that Cook requested that his restricted stock units not receive dividends. The dividends that Apple workers are getting amount to $2.65 per quarter for each restricted stock unit held. The shares are not normally eligible to receive dividends, so Apple’s decision is a perk for its employees.

    The Bomb Hidden in Mitt Romney's Education PlanSlate

    Associated Press

    Study: Typical CEO Pay Up 6% to $9.6 Million

    NEW YORK — Profits at big U.S. companies broke records last year, and so did pay for CEOs.

    The head of a typical public company made $9.6 million in 2011, according to an analysis by The Associated Press using data from Equilar, an executive pay research firm.

  • Corey

    Nice.

    Always fun to hear what Cialdini is up to…and Mary Luce was the editor (Luce is a big name in decision-making research and really helpful to grad students she doesn’t even know…).

  • Tan Boon Tee

    Undoubtedly, the mission of National Math and Science Initiative is respectable and commendable. Yet some of the means to achieve the ultimate goal leave much to be desired.

    Indeed, average high school students in the US are not performing well in science and math compared to their counterparts in the OECD nations. The rankings drop further when other Asian nations are taken into account.

    To spend millions of dollars to entice students (and to some extent teachers) may not be the best or wisest move for NMSI. While it could work for some students with strained financial resources, by and large, the effect would likely be insignificant. Perhaps money in the form of lucrative, competitive tertiary scholarships would provide greater as well as more functional incentives.

    Most Americans are quite well to do and have relatively easy lives; the youngsters are prone to having fun and outdoor activities. There is no urgency for them to study hard to gain a degree for higher salary or better social mobility. The motivation to learn science and math has often been weak if not minimal.

    Surely there are more tangible ways to promote science and math learning. (Tan Boon Tee)

  • MountainGal

    While tagging assignments may help students re-frame how they approach homework, it would be drop in the bucket of our otherwise media-saturated world. When video games celebrate violence, cable programs glorify scantily -clad females and kids are directly marketed to, its no wonder why they value what they do; which is not hard work and education. The government is also failing, as many school districts are grossly under financed and metal detectors replace music and art programs, so what message does that send to kids?

  • yeah man

    Wow. I agree, the key is to create more viable social norms and find better ways of reinforcing them….Question is, in a capitolist society, is there a difference between social and market norms? Great work.

  • Sarah

    When I talk to high schoolers, one of the most consistent comments I hear is, “Why should we work hard in our classes if nothing we learn actually matters?” And what troubles me is that they are right!

    I think there are two main problems with the idea of paying students for good grades:
    1) The assumption that a high test score signifies a mastery of the material. Acquiring the skill of taking a standardized test does not equal a comprehensive understanding of a subject.
    2) The creating of a highly competitive, individualistic learning environment. If students are intimidated by competition, they may self-handicap (by not studying) in order to avoid failure. In reality, most scientists work collaboratively in an interdependent community. It makes much more sense to create a learning environment in which students learn from each other and share the same successes!

  • Bryan from Houston

    The difficulty with social norm and a market norms study is that it have be done across all backgrounds and levels of socioeconomic groups.

    My mother is a school teacher, and it is well understood that there is an extremely high correlation between parents who have high levels of performance and their children.

    Just as the children of Michael Phelps and (for example) Dana Torres would probably make some amazing swimmers. It does not mean it will happen but I would bet on the product of that union over say, Rush Limbaugh and his wife.

    The reality is that there are an unbelievable number of factors which are in degrees determinative of a kid’s success or failure. For kids on the lower end of the scale, money could very well be a huge factor in getting them to study very hard. If the difference between you being able to buy the latest IPOD or game system and not having anything at all is some Bs and B+s, the incentive is huge. At the same time, the headwinds can be tremendous as well. I have seen kids whose mom is a streetwalker and strung out on crack. So downtrodden that it is essentially the kids taking care of the parents and the younger children. In yet other situations, parents are so busy that they fail to raise their children and teach them the value of hardwork.

    While it is nice to pontificate on the effectiveness, it is only likely to really help those who are already predisposed to doing well or who have the marginal capabilities with some level of unrealized potential. The difficulty is that there is no way of categorizing in the educational process. Past behavior is not necessarily indicative of future performance. :-)

    Bryan? (since Barbara has already taken the !)

  • Corey

    Bryan,

    You’re presupposed that what’s referred to an entiative theory of intelligent (i.e., intelligence is a fixed constant). In fact, children with such an internal theory tend to give up on difficult problems sooner than those who have a theory of intelligence based upon effort (i.e., intelligence is not fixed).

    If others are interested, I’ll go dig up the relevant citations for reading.

  • tegwar

    Wow. I agree, the key is to create more viable social norms and find better ways of reinforcing them….Question is, in a capitolist society, is there a difference between social and market norms? Great work.

    Tough question. My inclination is the answer is (and must be) yes: there is a difference between social and market norms. I know some have re-imagined the bonds of family and friends in terms of transactions, costs / benefits and long-term pursuit of individual gain (i.e. market norms)… but damn if that work doesn’t feel as if its missing the essential soul of what’s happening. That’s the most basic source of my conviction that social norms are not necessarily encapsulated within market behavior.

    However, the concern, voiced throughout these posts, is that the social and market motives are incompatible – i.e. not mutually reinforcing but rather self-reinforcing. Market behavior breeds market behavior; to the detriment of socially motivated behavior (to simplify). And likewise, the social motive doesn’t encourage the market motive. So at some point, social norms may be subsumed and encapsulated by market norms … not sure that’s a situation we want.

  • Barbara Kiviat

    This is really interesting stuff. Thanks.

  • nilses

    I think the biggest factor in the mindset of American kids is the fact that from an early age, kids are taught that they are different (superior to) from kids in other countries because they are Americans. Thus, whenever a statistic about the academic performance of another country in comparisson to the U.S. is thrown out in an U.S classroom, children tend to roll their eyes and pass it off as unimportant. If this mindset was altered, to include rather than disregard those children in other countries (to unify us), from an early age it would make a world of a difference in children’s drive to succeed.

blog comments powered by Disqus