Classroom Reward Structures and Academic Performance

Abstract

Classroom reward structures refer to the performance criteria, contingencies, or standards that students must satisfy in order to receive presumably valued or reinforcing consequences such as prizes or high grades. The reward structure typical of most classrooms appears to be some compromise between indirect individual competition, in which grades are assigned to students based on their performances relative to those of their classmates (i.e., the curve), and individual reward contingencies, in which grades are assigned to students on the basis of how much material each student apparently masters (i.e., the percent mastery criterion). The typical classroom reward structure has been increasingly criticized as being less effective than alterna tive reward structures in strengthening the academic perform ances of students (e.g., Deutsch, 1949a, 1949b; Coleman, 1959; Spilerman, 1971; and Johnson & Johnson, 1974). The critics have urged more frequent use of group reward structures (i.e., group reward contingencies and intergroup competition) and less fre quent use of individual reward structures (i.e., individual reward contingencies and individual competition) in schools. In addition, the critics have presented strong evidence that group reward structures more effectively strengthen certain process variables such as cooperation (i.e., collaboration and coordination), inter personal attraction among group members, and positive at titudes towards tasks, as well as actual performance on tasks requiring cooperative interaction (i.e., interdependent tasks) such as group discussion and problem solving (e.g., Johnson & Johnson, 1974). However, attempts to demonstrate that group

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 130 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.