running head: an abbreviation of the title in...
TRANSCRIPT
Final Report 1
Running head: FINAL REPORT
Final Report:
The Effect of Reward on Academic Performance
Group A
Laura Robertson
S. Wade Bradt
Martin S. Goodwin
Florida State University
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for
EDF 5442 – Inquiry & Measurement for Practitioners
Spring 2012
Dr. Jean-Marc Wise – Instructor
Submitted April 22, 2012
Final Report 2
Abstract
This inquiry addresses the effect of rewards on academic performance with a specific emphasis
on the collection of data related to the types of rewards used by teachers and instructors, and
their methods of application, that promote student engagement with overall educational
objectives. This data was collected using a survey and structured interviews. The survey
consisted of a series of questions that covered reward planning, application of rewards in
instructional activities, and general educator attitudes and experiences with the use of rewards.
Survey respondents consisted of high school teachers and college instructors with various levels
of teaching experience and backgrounds in different content areas. Structured interviews
focused on the types and uses of rewards in different academic environments. These interviews
were conducted with educators in three particular learning environments: 1) a traditional high
school classroom; 2) a traditional college classroom; and 3) an online (virtual) college classroom.
An analysis of the data collected using these methods indicates that rewards are moderately
applied in academic environments and that the greatest influence of rewards is on student
participation and motivation instead of student academic performance. However, these findings
may lack generalizability to the larger population of educators and range of instructional contexts
given the small sample size and limited scope of the inquiry effort.
Final Report 3
Introduction
Rewards have been used in different learning environments with varying effect (Watcher,
Lungu, Liu, Willingham, & Ashe, 2009; Chapman & Cope, 2004). The goal of this inquiry was
to explore how educators plan for, use, and reflect upon various reward contingencies in their
respective academic environments. To this end, the inquiry relied on an educator survey and
individual interviews to collect both quantitative and qualitative data that provided the basis for
an examination of educator opinions and attitudes on the use and effectiveness of rewards with
respect to student motivation and performance. The primary research questions addressed by
this inquiry are: 1) How are rewards applied in an academic environment?; and 2) How does the
presence of a reward influence student motivation and performance? Findings from the inquiry
efforts provide a snapshot of the use of rewards within the scope of this project and are related to
pertinent items in the reviewed literature. This report also includes the protocol and results from
a usability test conducted to evaluate the use of a software tool to assist educators in the tracking
and management of reward systems. The report concludes with an examination of inquiry
limitations and suggestions for further research.
Literature Review
There have been many different studies in recent years that have endeavored to identify
and quantify how rewards influence student motivation and academic performance. These
studies vary in scope and provide different investigative aspects of the use and efficacy of
rewards to influence learner performance. Studies were selected for review based on the
relevance of the study to the relationship between the application of rewards and learning
performance. Articles that focused on the relationships between rewards and other types of
performance, such as the accomplishment of job tasks, as well as those that contained a heavy
Final Report 4
neurobiological focus on the efficacy of reward, were typically rejected unless they were relevant
to some type of learning context. Overall, the literature reviewed for this project related
specifically to the application and efficacy of different types of reward schemas in the academic
environment within the following areas: 1) studies that examined the specific and direct uses of
rewards to influence learner performance; 2) studies that investigated the negative effects of
rewards; and 3) studies that explored different methods of applying reward contingencies. The
results and findings of the studies reviewed for this project formed the foundation for the
development of specific survey items and interview questions and were used as a basis for
comparison of the data collected through the instruments used for this inquiry.
Studies that examined the direct application of rewards to influence learner performance
provided information on the efficacy of different types of rewards (Watcher, Lungu, Liu,
Willingham, & Ashe, 2009) and the impact of rewards on patterns of learner performance
(Oliver & Williams, 2006). An investigation into the direct effects of reward and punishment on
procedural learning (Watcher, Lungu, Liu, Willingham, & Ashe, 2009) indicated that reward, but
not punishment, enhanced the implicit learning of a procedural sequence. Another study that
focused on the awarding of bonus points as a reward among students of different academic
abilities and motivational levels (Oliver & Williams, 2006) indicated that the presence of reward
contingencies can be effective for students who are extrinsically motivated, but counter-
productive for students who are intrinsically motivated. These results were used to develop
survey items, interview questions, and usability test items that dealt with the uses of reward and
punishment as performance motivators and how rewards are integrated with other internal and
external factors.
Final Report 5
Articles and studies that investigated the negative effects of rewards were reviewed to
provide a more holistic perspective on the inquiry project topic and to identify the presence of
conflicting or contradictory findings relating to the use and efficacy of rewards. The findings of
these studies indicated that rewards may have an adverse impact on influencing learner behavior
and performance (Hall, 2009) and may create unintended expectancies within learners that
negate reward value and minimize other motivational factors (Balsam & Bondy, 1983;
Eisenberger, Pierce, & Cameron, 1999). These findings were used to develop interview
questions that probed individual educator experiences with the adverse or unintentional effects of
reward implementation.
Literature concerning the differential application of rewards provided insight into the
influence of reward implementation on overall reward effectiveness (Fischer & Born, 2009;
Chapman & Cope, 2004; and Von Mizener & Williams, 2009). The information contained in
these studies identified the particular implications associated with the methods in which rewards
are applied to different levels of learning objectives in a classroom environment, the influence of
different learning modalities as determinants of reward effectiveness, and the relationship
between student autonomy and reward contingencies. Specifically, findings from studies that
addressed reward implementation found that the anticipation of a reward can positively influence
learning and is particularly effective when a period of sleep is allowed between the initial
learning of the task and subsequent recall testing (Fischer & Born, 2009); that the learning
modality, such as the level of student interactivity and collaboration in learning exercises and the
use of modular lessons, may be the primary determinant in the efficacy of a performance
incentive schema, suggesting that the types of learning activities subject to reward and the
methods in which those rewards are applied, and not the rewards themselves, may have the most
Final Report 6
influence on student performance (Chapman & Cope, 2004); and that educators should refrain
from negotiating reward contingencies with students, especially with respect to the type of
reward provided and the academic activities to which those rewards pertain (Von Mizener &
Williams, 2009). These findings were used to define the scope and content of particular survey
items and interview questions which addressed the timing of reward delivery, the types of
specific reward contingencies used by educators, and the level of student autonomy allowed by
educators with respect to reward management.
Methods
Inquiry project data was collected via an online survey and through structured interviews
and was designed to explore the types of rewards used by educators, and their methods of
application, that promote student engagement with overall educational objectives. These
instruments were used to collect data on respondent experiences with the use of rewards and
their attitudes and opinions as to the overall effectiveness of rewards on student performance. A
usability test was also conducted to evaluate the use of a Microsoft Excel template in tracking
and managing reward systems by educators.
Survey Instrument
The online survey instrument was administered between March 21, 2012 and March 28,
2012 and consisted of twenty-six items grouped into five sections, with each section consisting
of a group of items that focused on a different aspect of the use of rewards in an academic
environment (see Appendix A and Appendix B). The first section contained a series of questions
that were used to collect data on respondent demographics, such as teaching position, teaching
experience, level of education, characteristics of students, educational environment, and
Final Report 7
experience with receiving or administering specialized training on the use of rewards as
educational tools.
The second section contained Likert-style questions that were used to collect data on the
frequency with which respondents incorporate reward contingencies during lesson planning
activities and how often they collaborate among other colleagues concerning reward systems.
Survey items in the third section focused on the application and effectiveness of rewards
during instructional activities. This section contained a series of statements and used five-point
Likert scales to collect data on each respondent's level of agreement with each statement. These
survey items were used to capture respondent opinions concerning the use of rewards to
influence student motivation and participation, the effect of reward on student test scores, the
effectiveness of different types of rewards, and the importance of rewards in overall teaching
strategy.
The fourth section of the survey contained two statements concerning the applicability of
survey items. Responses to these statements were captured using a five-point Likert scale and
were intended to help establish the face validity of the survey.
The final section contained three open-ended questions designed to collect information
on respondents' personal experience with reward systems. These questions focused on the
purposes for using rewards, the types of rewards that have been found to be most effective, and
the negative effects of using rewards.
Survey Participants
The survey was deployed via Google Sites and Survey Monkey. Two groups of
participants were surveyed for this inquiry. The first group consisted of K-12 teachers in a
public school system. Within this participant group, 137 individuals were invited to complete
Final Report 8
the survey and 46 responses were received. Two of these responses were incomplete and were
excluded, resulting in 44 usable responses (32.1% response rate). The minimum teaching
experience of respondents within this participant group was one year and the maximum was 41
years (mean = 13.09 years with a standard deviation of 10.16). Respondents in this group
indicated that they primarily teach students in the 9th - 12th grades. Within these grade levels, the
respondents also indicated the further breakdown of students by subtype as shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Student Characteristics for Group 1
Traditional Special Education Gifted Advanced
Placement31 6 6 1
The second group consisted of college educators from a public southeastern university
whose primary roles are as professors or teaching assistants. Within this participant group, 16
individuals were invited to complete the survey and 9 responses were received. Two responses
were excluded because they were provided by individuals who did not meet the participant
parameters of this group in that they were not college instructors, resulting in 7 usable responses
(43.75% response rate). The participants in this group included two full professors, two associate
professors, one assistant professor, one adjunct instructor, and one teaching assistant. The
minimum teaching experience of respondents within this participant group was three years and
the maximum was 24 years (mean = 12.29 years with a standard deviation of 7.07). The
respondents in this group indicated that they are evenly split between graduate and
undergraduate students.
A total of fifty-one respondents with varying levels of education participated in the
survey. A breakdown of education levels reported by respondents is contained in Table 2.
Final Report 9
Table 2: Respondent Educational Level
Bachelor's Degree Master's Degree Ph.D. Other13 29 7 2
Survey respondents who are high school teachers reported that they teach mostly in
traditional academic environments while respondents who are college instructors reported that
their teaching duties include a combination of traditional and online academic environments.
Table 3 shows the total number of respondents who teach in either traditional (face-to-face),
online (virtual), or blended classroom environments.
Table 3: Total of Educators by Environment Taught
Traditional Online Combination41 3 7
With respect to specialized training in the use of rewards, 11 respondents (21.57%)
reported receiving such training. Of these, the majority (72.7%) hold advanced degrees. This
data is contained in Table 4.
Table 4: Respondents Who Have Received Training In Rewards as Educational Tools
Bachelor's Degree
Master'sDegree Ph.D Other
3 6 2 -
Structured Interviews
Structured interviews with three individuals were conducted between April 1, 2012 and
April 8, 2012. The purpose of these interviews was to explore the interviewee’s attitudes and
opinions on the use and limitations of rewards in the following specific academic environments:
1) a traditional high school classroom; 2) a traditional college classroom; and 3) an online
college classroom. These interviews are referenced as Interview #1, Interview #2, and Interview
Final Report 10
#3, respectively. The specific protocols used for these interviews are contained in Appendices C
through E.
Interview #1 was conducted with a public school teacher with nine years of experience
teaching middle school and high school classes. The interviewee has varied experience in
teaching with different subjects and levels of students and was interviewed to explore the
individual's pertinent attitudes and opinions on the use and limitations of rewards with students
in a traditional high school classroom environment.
Interview #2 was conducted with a college instructor at a public southeastern university
who primarily teaches traditional classes. The interviewee has over three years of experience
teaching in a traditional college environment at the undergraduate level and has experience both
in teaching the use of rewards and applying reward contingencies and was interviewed to explore
the individual's pertinent attitudes and opinions on the use and limitations of rewards with
students in a traditional college classroom environment.
Interview #3 was conducted with a college instructor at a public southeastern university
who primarily teaches online classes. The interviewee has approximately seven years of
experience teaching in an online environment at both the undergraduate and graduate levels and
was interviewed to explore the individual's pertinent attitudes and opinions on the use and
limitations of rewards with online students in a virtual classroom environment.
Usability Testing
Usability testing focused on the use of the Vertex 42 School Reward Chart (Vertex 42
LLC, 2012) to manage reward systems. This chart is contained in Appendix F. The Vertex 42
School Reward Chart is a spreadsheet template that uses the Microsoft Office Excel application
to allow users to enter data, tally scores, and print final results and is designed to provide
Final Report 11
educators with the ability to implement and manage customized student reward systems. The
usability test protocol consisted of three tasks for the participant to complete:
1. Enter student data;
2. Enter reward activity information; and
3. Enter earned reward points.
The usability test was administered to three different participants and was conducted
using the Concurrent Think Aloud (CTA) protocol. Each participant was provided with identical
sample data to ensure test congruence.
Findings
Survey Findings
Overall, 55 participants responded to the survey. As previously noted, four of these
respondents were excluded from the data analysis, two because of incomplete responses to
survey items and two because they did not meet the respondent parameters of the inquiry. The
data from the remaining 51 respondents provided the basis of the data analysis efforts.
Section One of the survey contained the demographic data described in a previous section
of this report. The survey consisted of four other sections that focused on different aspects of
reward application and effectiveness, including the use of rewards in instructional planning,
application of rewards in academic activities, and overall experience with the use of rewards.
Section Two of the survey dealt with reward planning, both on an individual and
team/department basis. Data collected from items in this section of the survey indicated that
most respondents only plan and use rewards sometimes. In addition, a majority of respondents
(74.5%) indicated that reward planning is seldom or never coordinated with other teachers or
their department. This data is summarized in Table 5.
Final Report 12
Table 5: Reward Planning and Coordination
Never Seldom Sometimes Often AlwaysFrequency of Active Reward Planning
2 14 24 9 2
Frequency of Reward Coordination
24 14 11 2 -
Section three of the survey dealt with the effectiveness of rewards as it pertains to their
impact on student performance and motivation in the classroom setting. Data collected from the
items in this section pertain to the levels to which respondents agreed or disagreed with specific
statements and is summarized in Table 6.
Table 6: Effect of Rewards on Student Performance
Statement Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
AgreeRewards increase student test scores.
3 6 23 19 -
Students are primarily motivated by their interest in a subject.
1 10 5 26 9
Students work harder when there is a reward for performing well.
- 9 12 27 3
The use of rewards is an effective method of motivating student participation.
- 3 14 32 2
The type of reward determines its effectiveness.
- 7 17 25 2
Final Report 13
Respondents were asked how strongly they felt rewards in the classroom increase the test
scores of their students. While nineteen respondents (37.25%) agreed that rewards increase their
students’ test scores, twenty-three participants (45.1%) responded with neutral agreement. The
majority of respondents (68.63%) either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that
students are primarily motivated by their interest in a subject. Twenty-seven of the participants
responded that they agree their students work harder when they know there is a reward for
performing well. In total, thirty of the respondents (58.82%) agreed or strongly agreed that
students work harder when a reward is available. With regard to motivating student
participation, the majority of the respondents (66.67%) reported they agreed or strongly agreed
with the use of rewards being an effective method of motivating student participation. Finally,
the majority of the participants (53%) responded that they either agreed or strongly agreed that
the type of reward determines its effectiveness. Seven participants (13.73%) disagreed, and the
remaining seventeen responses (33.33%) were neutral on the item.
Items in Section Four were included to help determine the face validity of the survey.
This section consisted of two items which elicited responses concerning the pertinence of survey
items and the extent to which the survey accurately addressed respondent opinions on the use
and effectiveness of rewards. Data from this section is summarized in Table 7.
Table 7: Respondent Opinions of Survey Pertinence and Accuracy
Survey Attribute Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
AgreePertinence 1 3 15 29 3
Accuracy - - 10 37 4
With respect to the pertinence of survey items, 62.7% of survey respondents indicated
that they either agreed or strongly agreed that the items in the survey were pertinent to the use of
Final Report 14
rewards in their academic environment. An additional 29.4% of respondents were neutral on this
item. This indicates weak to moderate face validity of the survey and, given more time and
resources, would provide the basis for refining survey items through feedback from survey
respondents and the use of additional pilot groups to provide further validity testing of the survey
instrument. On the matter of survey accuracy, 80.4% of respondents indicated that they either
agreed or strongly agreed that the survey accurately addressed their opinions on the application
and effect of rewards.
Section Five of the survey contained three open-ended questions relating to the types of
rewards used, the purpose for using rewards, and the negative aspects of using rewards. The
responses to these questions support the data collected from other survey items and are examined
in more depth in the Discussion section.
Interview Findings
The results of the three interviews conducted for this inquiry mostly supported and
confirmed the data collected from survey responses. Specifically, interviewees were unanimous
in indicating that the awarding of bonus points and the opportunity to engage in extra activities,
such as group games or exercises, are more effective than candy, tokens, and other similar
rewards. The most common theme to emerge from the interviews was the experience related by
the interviewees that the greatest type of reward is educator involvement in individual student
performance. While this is not usually considered a reward per se, active educator involvement
and attention to a student’s learning process instills a sense of value within the student that can
be a powerful motivator with respect to participation and academic performance.
The only major difference in interviewee opinions on rewards centered on their
application in online versus traditional academic environments. Interview subjects who teach in
Final Report 15
traditional environments did not indicate that the use of rewards should be limited and agreed
that students should be informed of the presence of a reward when available. Conversely, the
interview subject who primarily teaches online classes indicated that rewards should be used
sparingly in a virtual environment, since the overuse of rewards may supplant an online student's
typically high level of intrinsic motivation by shifting the student’s locus of control toward
external factors, and that the presence of rewards should not be advertised, since rewards have
proven to be most effective and have the greatest lasting value when students are unaware of the
presence of a potential reward for a given assignment or activity.
Usability Test Findings
Findings from the usability test indicated that participants were initially confused about
where to begin entering data in the template and that entering reward activity information proved
to be tedious and overly difficult using the existing format of the template. Column and text
sizes had to be continually adjusted to accommodate inputted data and enhance readability and
the template lacked a feature for tallying reward point totals. Time on task for entering student
data was comparatively shorter than it was for entering reward activity information. The number
of identified problems/issues identified per task are contained below:
Enter student data: 1
Enter reward activity information: 5
Enter earned reward points: 2
Discussion
The discussion of inquiry findings are broken down into four general areas: 1) reward
planning; 2) reward application; 3) reward effectiveness; and 4) survey face validity. With
respect to reward planning, survey responses indicate that most teachers take an individual
Final Report 16
approach to the use of rewards in their instructional planning activities. The majority of
respondents (74.5%) indicated that they seldom or never coordinate the use of rewards with their
departments or with other teachers. Surprisingly, a greater percentage of college instructors
(85.7%) than high school teachers (65.9%) indicated that they use rewards at least sometimes in
their instructional activities. This contradicts some of the data contained in the literature
reviewed for this inquiry, which indicated that the use of rewards tends to decrease as students
get older and advance in grades. Davis, Winsler, & Middleton (2006) found that 75% of college
students participating in a survey concerning their experiences with rewards indicated that the
availability of rewards in their academic environments decreased as they progressed through
their schooling.
Data collected on reward application showed some surprising results as well, with the
majority of respondents (76.47%) providing either negative or neutral responses with respect to
rewards being an integral part of their teaching strategy. This, again, contradicts some of the
literature reviewed for this inquiry, which indicated greater application of rewards in an
instructional environment. Specifically, Hoffmann, Huff, Patterson, & Nietfeld, (2009), in their
survey of educators concerning the prevalence of rewards in academic settings, report that 79.1%
of respondents indicated that they incorporated the use of rewards in their teaching strategy on at
least a weekly basis. Interestingly, respondents did report a link between the application of a
reward and increased student participation and motivation, with a majority (66.67%) of
respondents indicating that using rewards is an effective method of increasing student
participation. This is consistent with the responses one of the open-ended questions contained in
Section Five of the survey, which asked respondents their purpose for using rewards in the
classroom and provided three specific prompts (participation, morale, and academic
Final Report 17
performance) as example responses. Participation was the most often cited reason for using
rewards (64.71%), followed by academic performance (45.10%) and morale (19.61%). In
response to the open-ended question of whether or not using rewards decreases student
motivation or performance, a vast majority of the responses (40) answered with “no.” One of the
respondents commented, “No, the use of motivation has always increased student performance."
Additionally, 58.8% of respondents indicated that their students work harder when they knew
their efforts will be rewarded.
Responses related to reward effectiveness also seems to contradict some of the literature
reviewed for this inquiry, with only 37.25% of respondents agreeing that using rewards increases
the test scores of their students. A majority of the studies reviewed for this inquiry indicated a
positive cause/effect relationship between the presence of a reward and individual performance.
For example, Watcher, Lungu, Liu, Willingham, & Ashe (2009) report that the presence of a
reward increased the learning of a procedural task, as measured by task response time, by 78.6%.
Additionally, Wageman & Baker (1997) found that reward interdependency significantly
influenced task performance.
Data collected on the pertinence and accuracy of the survey indicated that the survey had
weak to moderate face validity, with 62.7% of survey respondents indicating agreement that
survey items were pertinent to the use of rewards in their academic environment and 80.4% of
respondents indicating that they agreed that the survey accurately addressed their opinions
regarding reward application and effectiveness. This data reflects project constraints which
limited activities to verify and validate inquiry data collection instruments (e.g. pilot studies,
feedback).
Final Report 18
With regard to the responses received for our open-ended questions, 64.71% of survey
respondents answered the question “For what purpose do you use rewards in the classroom (e.g.,
participation, morale, academic performance)?” with "participation," while only 45.1% included
“academic performance” in their response. Two other purposes for the use of rewards that were
reported were “behavior” and “morale.” These two purposes were only reported by teachers in a
high school setting and made up a small amount of respondents. This shows a small variance in
purpose for use of rewards of teachers in various settings dealing with varying levels of students.
One respondent reported on the purpose of rewards as, “To get the students more focused and
stay on task under limited time.” While another responded with, “To encourage students to
stretch to do something they might not normally do (perform, work alone, etc.).”
In regard to the open-ended question, “What type of rewards systems have you found to
be most effective with your students?”, the three main types of rewards reported by the
respondents were points, candy/food, and choice of activities in the classroom. Thirty-one of the
respondents indicated that rewards with points, such as extra credit or homework passes, were
the choice type of reward for students followed by candy/food and the choice of a particular class
activity. One of the respondents stated, “In an online environment, bonus points work well.
Face to face, candy is an incredible motivator for young and old alike.”
While most of the respondents answered “no” to the question, “Has using rewards ever
resulted in a decrease of student motivation or performance?”, the few who responded with “yes”
had some interesting explanations that indicate an extrinsic reward can have a negative impact on
intrinsic motivation. A few of the explanations are cited below:
“Students began to wait until reward was offered to do work. Students need to recognize
in the real world, one must comply with performance requests without a “carrot” being offered.”
Final Report 19
“Students become desensitized to certain rewards and they will become less effective.
The use of some rewards also destroys the intrinsic motivation of students.”
“Using rewards regularly can create a mindset of expectation, thus lowering student
motivation to work on their own and study for the purpose of learning. For example, I have seen
students not complete required assignments, but then expect me to give bonus assignments for
extra points that will make up for the points they missed on the incomplete required work.”
The qualitative data collected by the survey via these open-ended questions is consistent with the
information discovered during the structured interviews, as explained in the Findings section of
this report.
Overall, the data collected within the scope of this inquiry indicates that rewards are
moderately applied in academic environments and that the greatest influence of rewards is on
student participation and motivation instead of student academic performance. However, these
findings may lack generalizability to the larger population of educators and range of instructional
contexts given the small sample size and limited scope of the inquiry effort.
Inquiry Limitations
There are two key limitations to the survey we used to collect data for this inquiry.
Although we were pleased with the response to our request (n=51) in comparison with the course
requirement, we understand that our sample size was extremely small. Ordinarily, our inquiry
plan would have included the sampling of teachers from multiple high schools and universities,
rather than just one of each. Ideally, we would also have stratified the response among different
types of teachers. For instance, being able to discriminate between the reward systems used for
“Special Education” and “Traditional” students would have been a meaningful effort.
Final Report 20
In addition to sample size, we also understand that this survey is inherently measuring
teacher beliefs and opinions. It would have been a significant improvement to have been able to
structure a study that actually measured student performance. In a real-world scenario, we would
have paired this more qualitative survey with a quantitative study measuring student performance
under varying reward systems. The results of this mixed-method approach would have provided
more robust data and allowed us to arrive at more valid and reliable findings.
Suggestions for Further Research
Even with the limited scope of this inquiry effort, several additional opportunities for
future research have been identified. While there are many different studies that have
investigated the uses and effects of rewards, there seems to be little inquiry into the application
of rewards in different academic environments. Research in this area would be particularly
pertinent given the emergence and popularity of e-learning, m-learning, and their associated
educational contexts.
Reflections
The following points list our general thoughts and reflections on the overall inquiry project
assignment:
More guidance on what topics to choose. We ended up choosing a topic that required a
constant narrowing of the scope to meet time constraints and that was not really
conducive to pertinent usability testing.
It would probably have benefited us to do several rounds of the literature review, getting
feedback after each round, and narrowing in on those publications which would be most
informative to our question.
Final Report 21
Separate the data in a way that could differentiate between what types of students are
affected by different types of rewards. For instance low-socioeconomic students, honors
students, standard students. The research could have shown different types and purposes
for each of these types of students and how or if that makes a difference.
Put a particular reward system into effect with selected teachers and collect data on how
effective/ineffective the reward is in those cases. Compare this data based on our
literature review.
Survey an equal amount of participants (high school setting vs. college) to be able to
compare the high school teachers' opinions/input to the college instructors'
opinions/input.
Implement a particular reward tool in various educational settings and collect data on its
effectiveness.
Overall, our team worked very well together and the guidance provided by the feedback
on different assignments and the opportunity to revise and resubmit particular
assignments provided some of the best learning experiences in this course.
Final Report 22
References
Balsam, P., & Bondy, A. (1983). The Negative Side Effects of Reward. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis, 16(3), 283-296.
Bartol, K. M., & Srivastava, A. (2002). Encouraging knowledge sharing: The role of
organizational reward systems. Journal of Leadership & Organization Studies, 9(1) 64-
76.
Berns, G., McClure, S., Pagnoni, G., & Montague, P. (2001). Predictability Modulates Human
Brain Response to Reward. The Journal of Neuroscience, 21(8), 2793-2798.
Chapman, E.S. & Cope, M.T. (2004). Group reward contingencies and cooperative learning:
Immediate and delayed effects on academic performance, self-esteem, and sociometric
ratings. Social Psychology of Education, 2004(7), 73–87.
Davis, D., Winsler, A., & Middleton, M. (2006). Students' perceptions of rewards for academic
performance by parents and teachers: Relations with achievement and motivation in
college. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 167(2), 211-220.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. New York: Plenum.
Eisenberger, R., Pierce, W., & Cameron, J. (1999). Effects of Reward on Intrinsic Motivation –
Negative, Neutral, and Positive: Comment on Deci, Koestner, and Ryan (1999).
Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 677-691.
Eisenberger, R., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Incremental Effects of Reward on Creativity. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 81(4), 728-741.
Final Report 23
Fischer, S. & Born, J. (2009). Anticipated reward enhances offline learning during sleep.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(6), 1586–
1593.
Hall, D., Bowen, D., Lewicki, R., & Hall, F. (1982). Experiences in management and
organizational behavior (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley.
Hall, P. S., (2009). Beyond rewards. Reclaiming Children & Youth, 18(3), 49-53.
Hoffmann, K.F., Huff, J.D., Patterson, A.S., & Nietfeld, J.L. (2009). Elementary teachers’ use
and perception of rewards in the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 843-
849.
Niehoff, B., & Mesch, D. (1999). Effects of Reward Structures on Academic Performance and
Group Processes in a Classroom Setting. The Journal of Psychology, 125(4), 457-467.
Oliver, R., & Williams, R.L. (2006). Performance patterns of high, medium, and low performers
during and following a reward versus non-reward contingency phase. School Psychology
Quarterly, 21(2), 119-147.
Von Mizener, B.H. & Williams, R.L. (2009). The effects of student choices on academic
performance. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11(2), 110-128.
Wageman, R., & Baker, G., (1997). Incentives and cooperation: The joint effects of task and
reward interdependence on group performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
18(2), 139-158.
Watcher, T, Lungu, O.V., Liu, T., Willingham, D.T., & Ashe, J. (2009). Differential effect of
reward and punishment on procedural learning. The Journal of Neuroscience, 29(2),
436–443.
Final Report 24
Appendix A - Survey Responses (College Instructor Survey)
Contained in a separate file
Appendix B - Survey Responses (High School Teacher Survey)
Contained in a separate file
Final Report 25
Appendix C - Interview Protocol (Interview #1)
Description of Interviewee
The interviewee is a K-12 teacher. She has nine years of teaching experience in the
subjects of Math, Art, Physical Education and German. She currently teaches high school
German levels two, three and Immersion. The interviewee has been chosen for the interview
because of her varying background in subject areas and the different age groups of students that
she has taught throughout her career. Before coming to the high school, the interviewee taught
Math to middle school students at a title one school. She has direct relation to the inquiry project
through her profession as a teacher in a public educational setting. The interviewee works with
students each day and understands the challenges in motivating them to perform. This interview
will allow the inquiry team to collect relevant data on her uses, forms, and opinions of reward
systems.
The Setting
The interview process will take place in the World Languages building where she
teaches. I have arranged to come to her classroom to make her more comfortable during the
interview. The technology that will be used during the interview is a hand-held recorder provided
by the language department. The interviewee has agreed to have the interview recorded. This
tool will allow me to record the interview so that I can refer back to her answers for data analysis
purposes. This will expedite the interview process because she will not have to wait for me to
write down everything she says. I will make note of the important main points in her responses
on paper. The reason for doing this is to record my initial reactions to her responses during the
interview. I will then replay the recording to fill in areas I may have missed or points that support
my initial comments.
Final Report 26
Opening and Closing Script
Opening:
“Thank you for taking the time to sit down with me to answer some questions relating to
the effect of reward systems on academic performance. The interview should not take any longer
than thirty minutes. This interview is completely confidential and will not be shared with anyone
other than my inquiry project team and Florida State University course professor. I will keep
your name anonymous. The interview and your responses are part of the requirement for an
inquiry project I have been working on in my graduate courseware. My team is researching the
effect of reward systems in educational settings and how they affect academic performance.
Please feel free to ask me questions after we are finished. Again, thank you for taking time to
help me complete this interview.”
Closing:
“We are finished with interview at this point. Thank you for sharing your responses. Here
is my contact information if you have any other questions relating to the interview. Do you mind
if I contact you via phone or e-mail once I review the interview in case I have any other pertinent
questions that come from your responses? Thank you again.”
Interview Questions
1. In your experience as a teacher have you used reward systems in your classroom?
2. Do you feel knowledgeable about different reward systems to use in the classroom?
3. What types of reward systems have you used in the past or are currently using in your
classroom? Please explain the reward and how it is used with your students.
4. What positive effects have you experienced from reward systems used in the classroom?
5. What negative effects have you experienced from reward systems used in the classroom?
Final Report 27
6. What factors determine how you apply rewards in the classroom?
7. For what purposes do you use rewards in the classroom? (Classroom management,
participation, morale, academic performance)
8. Do you believe using rewards affects the motivation of your students in the classroom? If
yes, please explain how rewards can affect the students’ motivation. If no, why do you
think rewards are used?
9. Have you experienced the use of rewards increasing student academic performance, such
as test scores?
10. Do you believe the use of rewards can affect the intrinsic motivation (motivation that is
driven by interest within) of students? If yes, please explain how or provide an example
of a time you experienced this in the classroom.
11. What types of reward systems have not worked in your classroom? Why do you think
they were ineffective?
12. Do you consider reward systems when planning for instruction?
13. Have you ever been triggered to use a reward system that was not previously planned
for? If yes, please explain what made you make that decision.
14. How often would you say you implement reward systems in your classroom?
Final Report 28
Appendix D - Interview Protocol (Interview #2)
Description of Interviewee
For this step in the process, I have elected to interview a subject who is a Ph.D. student at
a southeastern university and an instructor at the undergraduate level. I have selected to
interview this individual because she has taught Educational Psychology and Classroom
Assessment for pre-service teachers for the last 3+ years and thus has both used and instructed
her students in the use of rewards in the classroom. I feel as though she will be an excellent
interviewee on our topic because she can respond from experience as to her use of rewards (and
their application) in the classroom, as well as to her students’ response and discussion on this
topic when it has been part of their curriculum.
Intended Setting/Technology
For this interview, I have chosen to meet in person so that I can make notes as to facial
expressions, gestures, etc. I initially considered a phone interview out of a desire to make this
convenient for her, but believe that a face-to-face interview will allow me to develop more of a
rapport with her as we begin the interview. I have also decided to hold the interview in one of
the study rooms at the Learning Center in the Stone Building. As this location is familiar to both
of us, is public, but provides a quiet atmosphere for recording, I believe this will be optimal for
this situation.
I intend to use my iPhone as a recording device so that I can digitally capture my
questions and her responses. I have chosen to use this technology so that I have the ability to
listen back to responses, and so that I have a record of the interview. I am also researching
recording apps that will allow me to send that file quickly to my computer, and looking into
Final Report 29
some that claim they can send a text transcription of the interview to your email. I am not sure I
trust this claim, but it would be interesting to experiment with this technology.
Opening and Closing Script
Opening: This interview is being conducted as a course assignment to identify the effect
of rewards in the classroom. It should take us about take about twenty to thirty minutes to
complete. Your privacy will be respected as these results will be shared only with two team
members and our course instructor. Are you willing to proceed? OK, well, my name is Wade
and, as I said, I’m working with my group to analyze teacher experiences with rewards. I’m
going to begin by asking some simple questions, and then we’ll get to the hard stuff later okay?
(humor). May I record this interview so I will be able to review our talk later?
Begin Questions …
Closing: Thank you for taking the time to speak with me today. I really appreciate your
being willing to share from your experiences. Your responses will help us as we analyze our
data. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me via phone or email.
You should have both in the email I sent you earlier. Thanks again!
Interview questions Q1: What course(s) are your currently teaching?
Q2: How long have you been teaching this subject?
Q3: Do you use rewards as a part of your classroom strategy?
Q4: What types of reward systems have you used?
Q5: Can you describe the effectiveness of each?
Q6: Why do you feel they were effective? Why were they ineffective?
Final Report 30
Q7: As pre-service teachers, how would you describe the students’ knowledge of rewards
systems?
Q8: Do you believe that they are aware of your reward systems before you teach on that
subject?
Q9: What is their response to your reward systems after discussion on that topic?
Q10: Are they generally in favor of reward systems after these discussions?
Q11: Does their response encourage or discourage your use of reward systems in the
classroom?
Final Report 31
Appendix E - Interview Protocol (Interview #3)
Interview Description
This interview will be conducted to explore the application of rewards in an online
academic environment. This interview will build upon the data collected via the
teacher/instructor survey administered as part of the inquiry project effort and, in conjunction
with interviews conducted by other project members and the aforementioned survey, will
constitute the project's data collection activities.
The subject of this interview is a college instructor within the Florida State University
College of Education who primarily teaches online classes. This individual is being interviewed
to explore the individual's pertinent attitudes and opinions on the use and limitations of rewards
with online students in a virtual classroom environment. This interview is one component of the
broader interview activities conducted as part of this inquiry that will be used to explore the
application and effect of rewards in different learning environments. The results of this
interview will be documented in an individual interview report and will be an important
component of the inquiry final report.
Interview Setting
This interview will be conducted via an online communications tool, such as Skype or
WebEx, due to the geographical limitations involved in performing an in-person interview. The
selected tool's video chat feature will be used to emulate, to the greatest extent possible, the
conditions of a face-to-face interview. The interview will be scheduled to accommodate the
interviewee and will be performed during a time of day to minimize disruption of the progress of
interview. The interview will be recorded upon receiving consent from the interviewee.
Final Report 32
Opening Script
"Good evening. This is Martin Goodwin and I'm calling to perform the interview that we
scheduled."
"Before we begin, do I have your permission to record this interview? This recording will only
be used to ensure that I capture all of the details of the items we will discuss and will not be
shared with anyone else."
"Okay, the recording has started. Once again, this is Martin Goodwin and I am preparing to
interview an instructor with the Florida State University College of Education who primarily
teaches online classes."
"This interview is being conducted as part of a larger inquiry project into the application and
effect of reward in different academic environments. This project is being performed as a class
assignment in my Instructional Systems master's degree program. This project will not be
published and the data collected will only be used to meet the requirements of the class project."
"Are you ready to begin?"
Interview Questions
1. Do you use rewards as part of your academic strategy? These rewards can include such
things as the awarding of bonus points for particular activities, extending assignment deadlines
under certain conditions, or other types of incentives used to motivate students.
2. What types of rewards do you use?
3. How are these rewards applied with your college level students in general?
4. How are these rewards specifically used in your virtual learning environment?
5. What types of rewards do you use the most? Why?
6. What types do you use the least? Why?
Final Report 33
7. Given that the frequency with which rewards are used may not be related to their individual
effectiveness, what types of rewards have you found to be the most effective with your online
students?
8. What types of rewards are the least effective with your online students?
9. How do you determine the effectiveness of a reward?
10. What factors determine how and when a reward is applied?
11. What are some of the limitations of using rewards in your online classes?
12. Have you ever experienced any negative effects in the use of rewards with your online
students?
13. Is there any other information about the application and effect of rewards in an online
environment that you feel is important?
These questions will form the core of the interview. Additional questions may be asked to
follow-up on the information provided or clarify specific points that are important to the overall
inquiry project effort.
Closing Script
"Thank you for participating in this interview today. Your insights into the use of rewards in an
online environment have been extremely helpful and are very important to my inquiry project
efforts."
"I should have everything I need, but may I call you or send you an email if I have additional
questions or need to clarify some of the information you've provided?"
"Very good. Once again, thank you for your time."
Final Report 34
Appendix F - Vertex 42 School Reward Chart