PCT misapplied to education

CSGnet Archive CSG1997
1

[From Bruce Abbott (970208.0150 EST)]

Bruce Gregory (970207.2115 EST) --

Bruce Abbott (970207.1055 EST)

I'd like to hear some discussion of
this issue, as the use of _genuine_ praise seems to be a key component of
successful educational programs. I have some ideas on the matter, but I'd
like to hear from anyone who cares to venture a reply first before I add my
two cents.

I suggest you take a look at Alfie Kohn's _Punished by Rewards: The
trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A's praise, and other bribes._.
You may find there is less evidence for the importance of praise,
genuine or other, than you may believe.

I wouldn't rely too much on Kohn's book; it leans heavily on selective
citation to make its case. Kohn was trying to support an argument, not
impartially weigh the evidence, and he left a good deal of the contrary
stuff out. Very one-sided.

Furthermore, I am specifically asking about genuine praise and
encouragement, not the "rewarding" of responses. Are you suggesting that
students don't need it? If so, I'd hate to be in one of your classes, where
never is heard an encouraging word . . . (;->

Consider the following two scenarios:

(1):

  Student: "Teacher, teacher, look at the map I made!"
  Teacher: "Yeah, sure. Geez, that doesn't look much like California;
           you made it too big on the bottom."

(2)

  Student: "Teacher, teacher, look at the map I made!"
  Teacher: "You must have worked really hard on that! Good Job!"
           (The interchange ends with the teacher and student giving each
            other the "high five.")

Obviously the student in scenario 2, having just been punished by the
teacher's encouraging words, will never attempt to make another map.
According to you and Kohn, that is. And, of course, the student in scenario
1 is now feeling great about himself and is now eagerly contemplating making
an even better map for the teacher to comment on.

Oh my gosh, I just realized why you have been praising Rick Marken so much
lately, you clever dog, you!

Regards,

Bruce

2

*From Tracy Harms (1997;02,07.23:23 PST)

Bruce Abbott (970208.0150 EST)

[...]
Obviously the student in scenario 2, having just been punished by the
teacher's encouraging words, will never attempt to make another map.
According to you [Bruce Gregory (970207.2115 EST)] and Kohn, that is.
And, of course, the student in scenario 1
is now feeling great about himself and is now eagerly contemplating
making an even better map for the teacher to comment on.

Neither example satisfies me. I see the teacher's responsibility to
simultaneously encourage the student and provoke critical attention toward
the work. Yes, it is very bad if the shortcomings of work at hand are
projected onto a student's character. However, nothing-but-praise is
unlikely to leave the student "eagerly contemplating making an even better
map" -- especially if there is no sense in the student's own mind that it
could be any better.

Tracy Bruce Harms
Lake County, California

3

[From Bruce Abbott (970208.1010 EST)]

Tracy Harms (1997;02,07.23:23 PST) --

Bruce Abbott (970208.0150 EST)

Obviously the student in scenario 2, having just been punished by the
teacher's encouraging words, will never attempt to make another map.
According to you [Bruce Gregory (970207.2115 EST)] and Kohn, that is.
And, of course, the student in scenario 1
is now feeling great about himself and is now eagerly contemplating
making an even better map for the teacher to comment on.

Neither example satisfies me.

That is because you do not understand my intention in raising them.

I see the teacher's responsibility to
simultaneously encourage the student and provoke critical attention toward
the work.

I agree.

Yes, it is very bad if the shortcomings of work at hand are

projected onto a student's character. However, nothing-but-praise is
unlikely to leave the student "eagerly contemplating making an even better
map" -- especially if there is no sense in the student's own mind that it
could be any better.

I agree with your comment entirely. Does that suprise you?

Regards,

Bruce

4

[Martin Taylor 970210 12:00]

Bruce Abbott (970208.0150 EST)]
Consider the following two scenarios:

(1):

  Student: "Teacher, teacher, look at the map I made!"
  Teacher: "Yeah, sure. Geez, that doesn't look much like California;
           you made it too big on the bottom."

(2)

  Student: "Teacher, teacher, look at the map I made!"
  Teacher: "You must have worked really hard on that! Good Job!"
           (The interchange ends with the teacher and student giving each
            other the "high five.")

Obviously the student in scenario 2, having just been punished by the
teacher's encouraging words, will never attempt to make another map.
According to you and Kohn, that is. And, of course, the student in scenario
1 is now feeling great about himself and is now eagerly contemplating making
an even better map for the teacher to comment on.

Notice the student's different (presumed) perceptual levels of control
that the teacher's actions influence in these to examples.

In (1) the teacher influences primarily those control systems relating
to map-making (presumably the topic being taught). In doing so, the
teacher also disturbs the student's perception of self (see Dick Robertson's
work). In many people, one high-level reference is to perceive one's self
as worthwhile, and so an influence that reduces the magnitude of that
self-worth perception will be countered; the teacher is setting up a
conflict that I mentioned in my previous message (970210 11:00) as to
be avoided. But the teacher is doing this as a side-effect of controlling
for creating and continuing the conflict that is required for teaching.
Bad idea--except that it isn't an idea at all.

In (2) the teacher is directly influencing the student's perception of
self-worth, in the direction of enhancing it, reducing any error the
student might have in that perception. The effect of this is to reduce
outputs that might (among other things) shift reference perceptions for
map-making, and reduce the likelihood of reorganization in the map-relevant
perceptual functions. This won't work, either. The student may make more
maps, getting plenty of praise, but unless the student perceives somehow
that the maps aren't very good, the new maps will be no better than the
first. And in addition, if the student does perceive that the maps aren't
very good when the teacher says they are, the student's perception of
the teacher's value as a teacher will be reduced.

However, if the teacher blends (1) and (2), as in (3):

"Hey, you've really worked hard on this. Congratulations. But do you see,
your California is a bit big on the bottom? It's pretty good, but I'm sure
you can find ways to make it better, and I'm here to help you if you want."

In (3), the teacher directly influences the student's self-worth perception
positively, recognizing the negative influence of the disturbance associated
with criticism of the map. The two influences may not neutralize each other,
but at least they will not have the bad effect of setting the teacher-student
conflict at the level of self-image perception. And the teacher at the same
time does set up a conflict in some perceptual controls relating to map
making. This is a useful conflict (assuming that the student wants to
learn to make maps), since it focusses reorganization in that area of
perceptual control.

Martin