In Daniel Pink’s book Drive, Pink talks extensively about the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic motivators.
An extrinsically motivated person is someone who is motivated by an external factor, usually money or some other form of good that isn’t necessarily related to a person’s occupation. For example, a doctor who is in it for the money is extrinsically motivated by the prospect of making money, not necessarily caring for people’s well being, or a student who is in it for the grade doesn’t necessarily learn, but does what is necessary for a grade.
An intrinsically motivated person is someone who is motivated by an internal factor, usually some sort of satisfaction or passion of what they get to do for themselves. For example, a programmer that works on an open source program that is freely distributed online is in it because of their love for the technology or the enjoyment of programming, not necessarily to make a name for themselves or earn great sums of money.
What’s interesting is that the book points to research that shows over and over that intrinsically motivated people always win out over extrinsically motivated people. Pink suggests that the ways that businesses and schools have been motivating employees and students are far from optimal, and by switching things around to encourage intrinsic motivators, we can take our economies and future to a whole new level.
“The problem with making an extrinsic reward the only destination that matters is that some people will choose the quickest route there, even if it means taking the low road. Indeed, most of the scandals and misbehavior that have seemed endemic to modern life involve shortcuts.” – Drive, Daniel Pink
What’s This Got To Do with Academic Integrity?
A problem that many schools face on a regular basis is academic integrity. Plagiarism and cheating not only causes harm to students, but the reputation of an institution as a whole. And as you probably know, the nearly unanimous and almost logical solution to academic dishonesty in schools is some form of punishment, whether it be detention, being dropped from a class, or expulsion.
But let me propose that by placing a punishment doesn’t actually make students less inclined to cheat, it probably causes more problems. Furthermore, along the same lines of Pink’s philosophy, I believe there is a much simpler and easier method to reduce academic dishonesty that would also positively impact learning and the education environment overall.
Let’s start by considering the very issue of academic dishonesty. Instead of dealing with the issue through reprimands, let’s consider what actually causes students to be academically dishonest in the first place, and maybe by dealing with those issues, academic dishonesty will be a thing of the past.
A student is academically dishonest when he or she chooses to take a shortcut and cheat off of somebody or something else over doing the work him or herself.
Why would a student make that decision?
That decision ultimately points to the fact that the student is more motivated by the prospect of getting a good grade than the prospect of learning the material. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the student is not interested in the material, it just means that the student is more interested in the grade than they are in the material. It may be that a student’s financial aid is dependent on their grades, or their college prospects are dependent on their grades, or even that their reputation is dependent on the grades they get.
Applying some principles from Drive, we find that academic dishonesty shows that a student is motivated extrinsically by the hope of getting a good grade more so than the hope of learning something they are passionate about.
Punishing students for being academically dishonest is placing cookies and vegetables in front of a child and punishing them severely for reaching for the cookies first.
Therefore, by putting grades, tests, and standardization around a subject, schools can actually turn something that a student is passionate about into something that a student dreads because their initial passion and intrinsic motivation for a subject quickly gets overtaken by the extrinsic motivation that schools place upon the student. (this happens far more often than you would think)
And if that isn’t bad enough already, enforcing rules against academic dishonesty is pretty much punishing students for a problem that the school caused, making it nearly a self fulfilling prophecy that people will almost naturally want to cheat and plagiarize. Punishing students for being academically dishonest is placing cookies and vegetables in front of a child and punishing them severely for reaching for the cookies first.
It simply doesn’t make sense.
That’s why I always roll my eyes and let out a sigh when I have to sit through yet another academic integrity presentation.
Instead of punishing the student for a natural result of extrinsic motivation, why don’t we place more emphasis on students being intrinsically motivated, and set up a grading system that doesn’t interfere with a student’s intrinsic motivation?
People cheat because they desire the end goal, obtaining a high grade, more than they desire learning the material.
Schools spend entire orientation lectures talking against cheating, but nothing to promote genuine learning.
I propose that if time is spent effectively teaching students the value of learning despite the grade, cheating will no longer be a problem.
However, the way that work is graded and degrees are given are mutually exclusive with such a change.