I find the intrinsic v extrinsic argument one that has simmered for a very long time in the teaching profession. Were I work, we would never countenance house teams and points which were heavily extrinsic in their thinking – given and taken away as the occasion demanded. Along with that there was an old school type of thinking that went with school houses, lists or tables that showed which house was winning – and also laboured on which was loosing. Only finding a model which avoids publicly demonstrating who has lost would be considered.

We always looked for intrinsic means of motivating. The trouble is that all too often, children only recognise that they have done well if they see something in their hands as proof of their success. General praise and public applause would not be enough. Hence a drift into certificates, or more recently “Spotted”s.

“Spotted”s are little slips of paper which say on one side,

“You’ve been Spotted by….”

and the teacher’s name follows. Amazingly simple in it’s concept. But this is a ticket to a greater prize! These are given to children, not just for good work, but also for good behaviour. They child might not even have been looking to receive this small token of praise, but the hope is that (and is generally the case) that when good/kind behaviour, or concentration on a task, is rewarded, then the child feels a warm sense of achievement and will remember that behaviour in the future and repeat it.

The reward can be given for anything you wish and for any circumstance e.g. a good idea, reasoning and explanation, writing, reading, leaving another fidgety child alone, keeping their temper when provoked etc…

It’s aim is to promote a positive ethos and attitude – and unlike house points, can’t be taken away once given.

The child writes their name on the back and it goes into the ‘spotted’ box. Each class has the chance of having one name drawn out each week and (here’s the carrot) that child – as well as being seen to have done something positive by the whole school, also has the opportunity to choose something from the head teacher’s treasure box!

It has proved to be very popular. It does reward in an extrinsic kind of way for more intrinsic actions.

Weekly non-contact time would crawl round and in the allotted shift I would sift through the backlog of mail and find myself making time to actually scan beyond the enticing ‘Don’t miss this opportunity, apply now!’ This might actually be something that could be meaningful to me, and, I can’t stress how important this and is, and not bore me to death with dissertations. Statements like ‘assessment via portfolio’ ‘written work or it’s equivalent – presentation/exhibition’ were music to my ears.
My friend and I were discussing how wonderful it would be to go back to college and just listen and not have to do all those laborious essays. Only do when really interested. How many people have you come across who have just finished – in particular – their English degree, A level, whatever, a subject they really thought they loved, and didn’t want to do anything with it again? Their love for reading or writing analysed out of existence. That is such a crying shame.
That’s why I’m somewhat nervous. On paper this course does look good and after the initial meeting I’m still feeling eager to press on. There are plenty of get out of jail cards to play. I can ‘rest’ after earning a PG certificate, or later with a diploma. But if I find the creative juices haven’t been altogether squished I can progress to the heady heights of MA. If I’m good enough. Well, we’ll see.
My other doubt, and this is one that was mooted by many who were there at the first meeting, is the all encompassing, exponential nature of teaching, subsuming all attempts at work/life balance. Really have to work hard to find the other you. It makes me feel how important it is to be selfish and seek out those opportunities to do something for your self.
OMG. I’m going to be a student again. I’ll get a bona fide card and everything. Wow!

One anecdote made me swallow back tears. He talked about how we can be trained into conditions, like flees. Flees can jump extraordinarily high considering their mass. But if you trap one in a cup and put a lid on it, it will eventually learn to jump to the height of the cup. And if you take away the lid it will still only jump as high as the cup – so never jumping out.

Admittedly, that’s not the part that made me tearful.

It was when he went on to describe an associate who had, as a child, loved singing. Sang all the time. But at some point in her Primary school life, the music teacher was listening to children for the school choir and had them all singing a song. She was to walk along the line, listening to them individually, and if she put her hand on the child’s head they were to mime. It makes my blood boil just to write this. Well, as you can imagine, the child in question was praying not to be touched. And sure enough, as the teacher approached, she touched her head. That spark of desire disappeared. She never sang again. Even to herself. She had been trained to jump only as high as the cup. Only to mime. Disturbing isn’t it, what we (i.e. teachers, trainers, adults) do for the accepted norm? And how thoughtless that norm is.

We need to see our selves without the lid. To learn to see the world and what we can do in it with new eyes. When that veil is taken away, my god it’s exciting.

Intelligence is dynamic, creative and reacts to different ways of seeing things.

We need to radically review our view of intelligence.

We’ve all been crippled or educated out of creativity. In this, frankly amazing and inspiring talk, Sir Ken Robinson discusses why we need to re-evaluate our approach to education. Creativity as important as Literacy? Shocking!

Schools Kill Creativity (link to the TED site)