Immediate rewards for good scores can boost student performance

Jun 26, 2012

Test performance can improve dramatically if students are offered rewards just before they are given standardized tests and if they receive the incentive immediately afterward, new research at the University of Chicago shows.

Educators have long debated the value of financial and other rewards as incentives, but a series of experiments in Chicago-area schools showed that with the right kind of rewards, students achievement improved by as much as six months beyond what would be expected.

The rewards apparently provide students with an incentive to take tests more seriously. One implication is that policymakers may underestimate students' ability in otherwise low-performing schools, according to the research team that conducted the experiments.

Researchers used to boost performance for older students and non-financial rewards, such as trophies, to improve performance among younger students.

The prospect of losing a created a stronger desire to perform than the possibility of receiving a reward after a test, the research showed. Students who were given money or a trophy to look at while they tested performed better.

"Most importantly, all motivating power of the incentives vanishes when rewards are handed out with a delay," said lead author Sally Sadoff, a 2010 PhD graduate in economics, who did the research as a Griffin Postdoctoral Scholar at UChicago from 2010-11.

Sadoff, now an assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego, was part a team that conducted a series of experiments involving 7,000 students in the Chicago Public Schools as well as in elementary and high in south-suburban Chicago Heights.

The team studied the impact of incentives on students taking relatively short, standardized given three times a year to determine their grasp of mathematics and English skills. Unlike other tests on incentives, the students were not told ahead of time of the rewards so they could not study but rather demonstrated the impact of the rewards themselves on performance.

The research was reported in the paper, "The Behaviorist Goes to School: Leveraging Behavioral Economics to Improve Educational Performance," published by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Sadoff was joined in her work by John List, the Homer J. Livingston Professor in Economics and one of the nation's leading scholars of experimental economics; Steven Levitt, the William B. Ogden Distinguished Service Professor in Economics at UChicago; and Susanne Neckermann, a scholar at the Center for European Economic Research in Germany.

The team found that elementary school students, who were given nonfinancial rewards, responded more to incentives than high schoolers. Those students were given trophies, as they have been found to be more responsive to non-monetary rewards than older students. Among high school students, the amount of money involved in the incentive mattered. Students performed better if offered $20 rather than $10.

"At Bloom Township High School, when we offered students $20 incentives, we found that their scores were 0.12 to .20 standard deviation points (five to sixth months in improved performance) above what we would otherwise have predicted given their previous test scores," Sadoff said.

List pointed out that the results of the experiments challenged a conventional theory that giving students tangible rewards "crowds out intrinsic motivation, rendering such approaches ineffective in the short run and potentially detrimental in the long run." The students tested had low initial motivation to do well, and thus benefited from the rewards, List said. He added that follow-up tests showed no negative impact on removing the rewards in successive tests.

The research helps teachers and school leaders better understand the role of rewards in school performance. Most rewards are delayed and involve a very distant horizon, such as the prospect of making a better salary as an adult as the result of better school performance, the team pointed out.

"The effect of timing of payoffs provides insights into the crux of the education problem that we face with our urban youth," the authors write. "Effort is far removed from the payout of rewards, making it difficult for students to connect them in a useful way. The failure to recognize this connection potentially leads to dramatic under-investment," as fail to apply themselves and policymakers don't realize the students' full potential.

Explore further: Why plants in the office make us more productive

Related Stories

Rewarding higher marks with money doesn't make the grade

Nov 22, 2010

(PhysOrg.com) -- Rewarding good grades with money has only a modest effect on students, says a new study conducted by researchers Tony Chambers (OISE) and Philip Oreopoulos (economics and U of T Mississauga) at the University ...

Bullying may contribute to lower test scores

Aug 07, 2011

High schools in Virginia where students reported a high rate of bullying had significantly lower scores on standardized tests that students must pass to graduate, according to research presented at the 119th Annual Convention ...

Recommended for you

Precarious work schedules common among younger workers

Aug 29, 2014

One wish many workers may have this Labor Day is for more control and predictability of their work schedules. A new report finds that unpredictability is widespread in many workers' schedules—one reason ...

Girls got game

Aug 29, 2014

Debi Taylor has worked in everything from construction development to IT, and is well and truly socialised into male-dominated workplaces. So when she found herself the only female in her game development ...

Computer games give a boost to English

Aug 28, 2014

If you want to make a mark in the world of computer games you had better have a good English vocabulary. It has now also been scientifically proven that someone who is good at computer games has a larger ...

Saddam Hussein—a sincere dictator?

Aug 28, 2014

Are political speeches manipulative and strategic? They could be – when politicians say one thing in public, and privately believe something else, political scientists say. Saddam Hussein's legacy of recording private discussions ...

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (2) Jun 26, 2012
This flies in the face of research on creativity. Creative problem-solving -- as demonstrated by the candle problem -- is known to *decline* when financial rewards are offered. See the book, Drive.
packrat
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 26, 2012
This flies in the face of research on creativity. Creative problem-solving -- as demonstrated by the candle problem -- is known to *decline* when financial rewards are offered. See the book, Drive.


Don't forget this is the 'me' generation that is used to getting what they want immediately...Most don't plan for tomorrow.