Posts
Also: Is "merit pay" for good teachers nearly as important as making it easier to get rid of mediocre teachers? (You want to get hissed, tell that to the NEA.) In the successful organizations I've worked for, the positive incentives (in the form of unequal pay) weren't nearly as powerful as disincentives (in the form of fear that you might get fired if you didn't do your part). For one thing, negative incentives are highly compatible with teamwork. They get the whole organization going, including people who'll never be hot enough to get performance bonuses. They don't breed envy and backstabbing.
kausfiles
I have no idea what to think about these things, and I find them fascinating. (I majored in psychology in college, my two interests being social psychology and cognitive psychology.)
I'm intrigued by this observation because behavioral programs for autistic children (and for dogs!) tell you never, ever to use punishment (or, iirc, the threat of punishment).
Punishment doesn't work!
That was gospel.
The best point behavioral trainers made to me about punishment not working was that a "no" doesn't give an autistic child any information. All he knows is the one thing on earth he shouldn't be doing, which doesn't tell him what he should be doing. With a very young autistic child, that's an important insight. Little autistic kids are perceptually besieged; the world is a jumble. (At least, that's what it looks like from the outside.)
Even so, it was obvious to me that the "punishment doesn't work" rule was wrong and ideological to boot.
But to this day I have no idea when and why punishment might be a better way to go than positive reinforcement, rewards, etc.
2 comments:
First, I agree that punishment is useful for demonstrating that something is a bad choice.
But second, my intuition is that there's a very different psychological effect when dealing with a group than with an individual. When members of a group see somebody "getting away with" something, it triggers an unfairness response. If Fred gets to talk in class, why don't I? If Mary gets to mail in her teaching, why should I spend this much effort?
"From each according to his ability" quickly becomes "from each according to what he feels like today". This is true in other soviet contexts, as we've seen over and over. Why would we expect it to be different in the case of collectivist schools?
But second, my intuition is that there's a very different psychological effect when dealing with a group than with an individual.
That makes sense.
"From each according to his ability" quickly becomes "from each according to what he feels like today".
I love it!
Post a Comment