I just recently started teaching 9th grade science at a high school in Northeast Philadelphia. I went into the classroom with the idea that I was going to start an education revolution and ended up smashed against the wall.
The problem: I personally do not believe in the use of punishments and rewards to motivate students. I believe that this only leads students to work for the reward and not for the sake of learning. My first few weeks were like hell as I tried to set up a classroom that was free of these punishments and rewards. I am now coming to the realization that the only way certain students work is if they receive something in exchange. Why should students want to learn anyway? Public school is a load of BS. Why should I expect them to want to learn something that doesn’t really connect with their daily lives? This is the challenge that I am currently facing.
I guess for now my best bet is to just implement a system of punishments and rewards to motivate my students and hopefully I can eventually reduce those punishments and rewards to the point where students will be working because they want to learn.
Teaching in public school is very difficult in that it is set up like a the prison system. It is hard working within a system that I do not believe in, and I pray that I do not burn out before the end of the year.
RandomBehaviorst said,
January 31, 2009 at 7:29 pm
Hi Raleigh, would you be willing to give me an example of what a classroom that does not utilize any rewards or punishments would look like?
Raleigh said,
January 31, 2009 at 11:17 pm
I have studied a few alternative approaches to education. I recommend the author Alfie Kohn. It is possible to set up your classroom to exclude a system of punishment and rewards. This would take far more work, and I think it would be quite difficult to implement in the public school system.
The classroom would be geared towards cooperation rather than competition. When students compete for grades (which is definitely a system of punishments and rewards), students desire to learn is often replaced by their desire to achieve a certain grade.
In the real world, people cooperate. Most jobs have us working and cooperating with other people. This is how we are programed, this is who we are.
Natural consequences works with a young population, but can take as many as 3 years to implement correctly. Instead of punishing students for doing something wrong, you give them choices on how they can fix the problem. Eventually the students will learn how to make the correct choices for themselves.
Having a class meeting once a week is one strategy. With a class meeting, you can discuss everything that happened within the week. What went well, what did not. Giving students a sense of autonomy and allowing them to participate in their education allows for an environment where force and coercion are no longer necessary.
A smaller setting is also important. The ideal classroom size would be about 15. The legal limit in PA is 33 and that is how many students they usually give to teachers. This student to teacher ratio allows less one on one time with each student.
I visited a school once in Newark Delaware called the New School. They had a very democratic school system, where students were in control of their education. The students chose what classes they were going to learn and even teach. It wasn’t based on testing, but was focused on learning.
I recommend this website to learn more about alternative education:
RandomBehaviorst said,
February 1, 2009 at 12:21 am
Thank you for the response. A couple of questions … with a classroom as you describe here, when a student refuses to engage in a work assignment, you would offer that student a choice of what?
When you say students compete for grades, how are they competing and who against?
Natural consequences work with a young population … what are you including as “natural consequences”? And why does it take 3 years for those to work correctly?
Thanks for your time.