week one

This week in 2250, I am a conflicted by the article, Grading: The issue is not how but why, by Alfie Kohn. Although I do intellectually agree with many of the ideas presented, my experiences have not always matched the perspective in this article. I think that this topic is not as black and white as this article proposes.

Throughout my journey as a young student, I had a very strong motivation to excel in every one of my endeavors. This article has created a debate in my mind as to whether my own motivation was intrinsic or extrinsic. Much of my motivation came from the desire to obtain a positive reaction. Not for bragging rights that I had a pile of rewards to show off,  but because knowing that I did a Good Job! made me genuinely happy to know that I was succeeding in the challenge or task. By knowing that I was "on the right track", I was encouraged to keep going. Now, one could argue that is an extrinsic motivation based on a reward system. For me, though, I relate it more to John Dewey's concept of social consciousness. In Dewey's My Pedagogic Creed, he states, "through the responses which others make to his own activities he comes to know what these mean in social terms. The value which they have is reflected back into them". I developed a desire to achieve my own success and mastery within my social environment. Can that be defined as strictly an external motivation to please others? Why can't that also be considered an internal motivation to progress within society? How exactly do we define internal motivation, anyway? We do not live our lives in black holes. We are influenced by everything around us from day one. Kohn discusses "learning for it's own sake" as being intrinsic, but how do we define value in something without some form of external comparison?

I do agree with Kohn that a grading system does not motivate students to success. I was motivated to get A's (the ultimate Good Job!) because I was already motivated to succeed. Because of this, I liked grades to be able to chart my own progress. Kohn also implies that grades can diminish motivation, and to that I partially disagree. I am currently an instructor at the college level. I see students like myself who are already motivated, and so they take pride in seeing a quantified record of their progress. I have also seen students who are not motivated. They just don't care about the process to learn and evolve. They are in school for purely external motivation (they are there to please mom and dad, or they think it will be an easy ticket to make money). That type of student doesn't seem to care about their grades, either. It's not the grades that made them not care, they already didn't care. One could drag in the chicken/egg argument on this one, but I really believe that the originator is not grading per se, it's a much bigger picture of overall personal motivation.

Granted, once a student gets to the college level, they are pretty well formed in their habits and motivations.   This whole discussion could be very different when examining a first grade child's motivation. I still believe that rewards for success are a good thing. I do, however, agree that punishments for failure can be damaging to young development. As Kohn said, assessment "should not be overdone". I think it is all in how it is presented. It should be an emphasis on progress, like an accumulation of points to be acquired over a long period. That can be tracked with an emphasis on the potential to always improve. Static grades on the other hand, can turn into a pile of  inflexible messages that say Good Job! or You're a loser! To many You're a Loser! messages, and it very well could create apathy toward the education process, especially in someone very young. Maybe my college students who just don't care did indeed get too many "You're a Loser!"'s when they were little. From my observations at the college level (and I think it might be similar with high school- I guess we'll see!!!), formal grades do not seem to directly influence personal motivation either way.

amber