Motivation Matters

There's an AP story posted today that pretty much sums up my frustrations as a high school student in a high-performing, affluent school district. Here's the basic gist of it:

"In most of the [Washington, D.C. area], a score of 90 or higher will earn a student the top mark. But in Fairfax County, (Va.) it takes a score of at least 94."

It's this kind of discrepancy that really irrated me when I was a student. Although I did not attend school in Fairfax County, my school district used the same grading scale as the one described in the article. Even between schools in the same district, it seemed to me that grading scales fluctuated significantly. It didn't seem fair that so much of my grade-point average depended on factors over which I had little control--what school I attended, what classes I took, and which teachers I had.

I wish I could have taken the advice of Robert J. Massa, vice president for enrollment at Dickinson College, and just "chill[ed] out about grades," but I still feel that's a hard request when you are one of hundreds of hard-working students in a county where almost everyone goes to college, competing for a limited number of spots at a state university.

But there's an interesting take on this in a similar article in the Washington Post, which says that grades are actually a better indicator of success in college than standardized tests. Also, grades are "much less closely correlated with student socioeconomic characteristics than standardized tests," say two researchers. I have to admit, reading that point of view has made me question my stance on grades in school. After all, it's much easier to point a finger at the system than to ask myself whether I should have worked a little harder or studied a little bit more.

What do you think? Do the discrepancies in grading scales between districts put some students at a disadvantage when they're applying for scholarships or vying for spots in colleges? Or is it a good indicator of student effort and achievement? Do the differences in the scales effectively account for varying economic and environmental factors? Or do they simply give some students an unfair advantage?

Posted by Katie Ash at 12:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBacks (0)

I read an article this morning called "Collaboration--Rather than Competition--For Quality Learning" by Marvin Marshall, author of the book Discipline Without Stress, Punishments, or Rewards. As the title suggests, the article makes the argument that learning is enhanced by a collaborative setting, rather than the traditionally competitive one that is used in most classrooms. Marshall says that competition creates more losers than winners, and as a result, actually reduces student motivation.

I agree with some of the things Marshall says in this article--I shy away from competition at all costs--but to me, there's a difference between competition in which you compare yourself to everyone else, and competition against oneself--a distinction I don't think Marshall makes. While competition between classmates may, in some cases, foster a hostile environment and decrease motivation by labeling some students as better than others, competition against oneself may encourage some students to strive for a higher grade or a more comprehensive understanding of a concept.

And while I look upon collaboration fondly in theory, I worry about how it often manifests itself in practice. I'm sure we can all recall being assigned to a group project in which one of the group members tries to scrape by doing as little work as possible. Or inversely, a group in which one person insists on doing all the work alone to ensure a high grade.

Regardless, Marshall's argument is intriguing and definitely worth thinking about. How does competition affect motivation? Is the disappointment of losing really enough to discourage a student from working hard in the future? Does an emphasis on collaboration help students be more engaged in their lessons and increase learning? Or does it make it too easy for some students to skate by on the hard work of others?

Posted by Katie Ash at 12:46 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

I'm not one to hold grudges, but my college application process was one of the most stressful and disappointing experiences in my recent memory. Despite four years of extracurricular activities, volunteer work, college-level classes, and loads of homework, I was still rejected from my first-choice school. Afterwards, I felt that if I had chosen to take a less-rigorous curriculum during high school, I would have had higher grades, and consequently, a higher class rank, which may have resulted in an acceptance letter.

Of course, that's all speculative, and some would just call me bitter, but I don't think I'm alone in my frustration. This past fall, I watched my younger sister struggle with the same problem I had when I was applying to college: how to get admissions officers to see you as more than a class rank. So it made me happy to see this article in the Dallas Morning News, which says that the University of Texas at Austin's admissions officers are putting less emphasis on rank, and more focus on essays, what classes the student took, and other factors.

When admissions officers look at each kid as a whole package, I think it makes students more likely to pursue activities, courses, and curricula that interest and inspire them most, rather than choosing whatever will keep them in the top 10 percent of their class. For some students, those paths are synonymous; others are not so lucky. I do not regret choosing the curriculum that I did in high school, as it shaped the way I think and instilled in me a life-long love of learning and education, but I do wish that it had not come at such a high price.

Enthusiasm, motivation, and determination are qualities that are strong predictors of success, but they can't always be defined by a number. And I think it's great that more college admissions officers are warming up to that idea.

Posted by Katie Ash at 1:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

It is the season for school report cards, and I’ve seen a number of news clips about student progress and overall school performance on state tests reported under the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind Act.

But alongside the coverage of test results, a parallel story line is playing out in many places. Cheating seems to be on the rise, or at least reports and allegations of it. Some observers have noted that with higher stakes comes a greater propensity to cheat on tests. And with the threat of school reconstitution, staff firings, and student retention linked to test scores, the stakes are pretty high.

Last month, the Dallas Morning News, which has conducted an extensive investigation of state test scores over the past year, found new evidence of cheating in some schools. In this news story, reporter Joshua Benton describes the case of Forest Brook High School. The newspaper uncovered suspicious patterns in the school’s test scores over the past two years in an analysis that led to a state investigation. The Texas Education Agency concluded that there was not enough evidence that cheating was involved in the school’s impressive test results.
As Benton reports, however, “the school’s scores collapsed” this year when state monitors “watched over every stage of the testing process in an attempt to prevent any potential misdeeds.”

Similar reports have surfaced in California and other states.

Across the pond, officials in the United Kingdom are dealing with similar issues, as reported today by the BBC, which has been conducting its own investigation.

“Cheating by teachers is so extensive that Chris Woodhead, the former head of the education standards watchdog OFSTED, says the league tables used by parents to differentiate between schools have become unreliable,” this BBC story reports.

The adults aren’t the only ones feeling the pressure. Students, too, are turning to cheating to ensure good grades.

The Plymouth-Canton Community Schools, a middle- class district outside of Detroit, decided this month to ban cell phones in classrooms to help head off cheating. Other districts across the United States have already taken that step. Many also require students to have their school assignments screened by software programs that are designed to identify plagiarized materials.

Is cheating an unintended but inevitable consequence of a high-stakes testing environment?

Posted by Kathleen Kennedy Manzo at 7:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

I've seen a ton of articles this graduation season about schools choosing to do away with class rank. For example, from today: "Schools playing down valedictorian honors." The whole thing's become too competitive, school leaders and parents say. But for many high schoolers, being at the top—or at least near the top—is a strong motivation to get good grades and take accelerated courses (if their school gives them extra weight when calculating rank). It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

Posted by Jess Tonn at 11:40 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

To appreciate how passionate some kids are about student academic competitions, you need only watch the National Spelling Bee on ESPN. Those boys and girls in that competition are engaged 100 percent in what they are doing. Other academic events, such as the Siemens-sponsored science competition,, showcase some of the most motivated students in the nation.

A colleague recently passed along an article that asks an important question: How might such competitions better inform educators and policymakers about how classroom learning should be designed and education policy crafted to maximize student motivation?

The article--which was written for the Education/Evolving Initiative, which seeks to connect the needs of today's students with education policy leaders--says that the universe of academic competitions "begs the attention of anyone interested in how to motivate students."

Yet the article points out that there are few studies, if any, that examine how the lessons learned from academic competitions might be used to better understand how students learn, what motivates them (intrinsically and extrinsically), and what real world experiences would benefit them the most.

Some education researcher (if one hasn't already) needs to tackle this topic and then spread the word about his or her findings. More than anything, the findings could provide major lessons for how schools can raise student motivation, and, in turn, achievement.

Posted by Kevin Bushweller at 9:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

A survey released today by the Josephson Institute of Ethics found that 60 percent of the 36,122 high school students surveyed admitted cheating on a testing once during the past year, 35 percent said they had cheated two or more times, and a third said they had used the Internet to plagiarize a school writing assignment.

The Josephson Institute has released figures on cheating every year since 1992. And, unfortunately, the cynic in me becomes less and less surprised by the seemingly high percentages of high school students who cheat.

That might be, in part, because I examined this topic in significant depth several years ago in a project published in American School Board Journal and sponsored by the Education Writers Association. The research and hundreds of interviews I did with students, teachers, principals, and ethics experts for that project, "Generation of Cheaters", was the spark that lit the cynicism I now have about the ethics of today's high school students.

Just the other day, a teenage boy who lives in my county and is a very good student (and a nice kid) told me that "cheating is a skill. It's something you need to learn how to do well." Undoubtedly, his perspective troubled me. But it did not surprise me. I had heard similar comments from hundreds of students I have interviewed over the years, for the special project on cheating and for other stories.

Students who cheat are motivated to do it for a number of reasons. At the higher end of the student academic ladder, it is to compete with peers for higher class rank or to earn higher grades and, in turn, get into a better college. At the lower end of the ladder, it is to get by without having done the necessary preparation for a test. And in some cases, cheating is motivated by a basic lack of confidence--a student might see that someone else has a different answer and switch his even though his answer might be correct and the one he is copying is wrong.

Whatever the motivation, I think it stinks that more than half of the high school students surveyed had admitted cheating and more than a third had done it more than once. But it troubles me more that those figures no longer surprise me or other adults. As much as they can, teachers, principals, and parents need to discourage and prevent this type of behavior.

One important lesson I learned in doing my research on cheating is that the kids who don't cheat are really ticked off that it is so easy for so many others to get away with it. If we begin to lose the ethics of those kids too, that 60 percent cheating figure might be 75 percent in another five years.

Posted by Kevin Bushweller at 5:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)