The Responsibility Project^®. Exploring what it means to do the right thing

Cash for Grades

95 Comments

May 1, 2008 by Kathy McManus

Education opens many doors.

 But should the main one be at the bank? 

School districts throughout the country are increasingly paying students for coming to class, taking tests, and improving their scores as part of controversial incentive programs known as "cash for grades." 

In Baltimore, high school students who make the grade can make some money--up to $110 for raising their scores on state assessment tests.

In Albuquerque, New Mexico, passing students can turn a school day into pay day, earning $300 if they attend 90% of their classes for the year. 

And near Atlanta, eighth and eleventh graders who take part in a special after-school study program are paid $8 an hour--more than the minimum wage in most states.

Supporters of earning while learning point to increased attendance and higher test scores at underperforming schools where no other form of educational motivation has worked. "We’re in competition with the streets," said one Bronx junior high school principal of her students. “They can go out there and make $50 illegally any day of the week. We have to do something to compete with that.” 

 But critics of the programs—many of which are privately funded--say the payments are simply bribes, and that using money as a motivator sends the wrong message to kids about their responsibility to learn. 

Would George Washington Carver have come up with his inventions in horticulture if someone had “bribed him?” asked one critic. Would Marie Curie have been inspired to spend long hours in the lab? “What kind of message do we give unmotivated kids,” he wondered, “when we give them something they never earned?” 

Tell us what you think: Should schools pay students to learn? Is learning all the way to the bank responsible?

95 Comments

What do you think? Leave a comment

• May 3, 2008 by Sandy

  At first this seems nothing more than a bribe, as critics note, but in thinking it over, I think it's not so bad. Learning for the sake of learning and as an investment in their future is not an easy lesson to impart on many kids. And the results are, they learn. After all, would most people have stayed in college or sacrificed to move up in our careers without being motivated by a better career, more money, or whatever motivates one? Would you have done it solely for the reward of learning and self improvement?

  Reply

  • June 16, 2010 by kelita andulique

    Well, you have a good point but then what will you do when they get older and they get a job or get thier own money one day?Well,then it would be a waste of your money so why get them in the habit of it when they are kids why dont you just buy them something take them to a movie or something that they will not get to used to,because from the way i see it is that they will never get to old to spend time with their parents,but you wil lalways get to old to spend moneythe way you used to!!!!!!:)

    Reply

    • July 4, 2010 by aaron peters

      There have been many inventions and discoveries, people have been motivated because of a need to be filled. I don't feel good about paying students to make good grades in school.. I feel that through home and environment they should be motiva ted enough yo learn on their own...

• May 3, 2008 by B. Ruble

  If my child's school had a program like any of those listed in the article. I think the kids that are scoring higher on tests and are going to school more often must be learning SOMETHING. What this article does not mention is what percentage of the school's population that DO NOT receives any of these "bribes". The article focuses on the percentage of increase in number of those who pass the tests or improve their attendance. The article does not state the actual starting point, so let's say a school with 1,000 kids in it had 200 kids passing the standardized tests, then after the "bribes" the percentage of kids who then passed the standardized tests increased 40% then the number of kids passing only increases from 200 to 280 out of the 1,000. 720 students are still not passing. My feeling is that if "bribes" help the kids learn AND pass so they can graduate, then that is great! But also what needs to be mentioned is "bribing" does not always work. I know there a lot of parents out there who tell their kids I will give X amount for each A, B, C or even D and it still doesn't change how well the kid does in school.

  Reply

• May 3, 2008 by Marlo

  I don't have any children, on purpose - don't want any - can't stand 'em. Having said that, my parents paid me one dollar for every A on my report card (nothing for anything less than an A). It doesn't sound like much, but I always looked forward to it. I didn't knock myself out trying to make straight A's, but I do think it made me try at least a little bit harder. Also, the article says many of these programs are privately funded, which sounds OK by me. The real question is: When did being smart become a BAD thing, and when did "work" become a dirty word? Come to think of it, when did READING become "work"?

  Reply

  • October 15, 2009 by johnny appleseed

    I have to agree with you because people in public or private schools were never paid to go to school it should be a privilege to learn and go to school because people in other countries cant get education or go to schools it would be a privilege to get a education without getting paid.

    Reply

• May 3, 2008 by Donna Shelton

  Each person has his or her own motivation factor within. Some kids will be motivated by money; some will be motivated by learning itself. Children develop their minds and moral boundaries as they grow. If even one child, who wasn't interested in books or school, is motivated to study and get better grades because of cash incentive, then who knows...that child may realize that he or she really DOES love to learn. That child might have been an at-risk student who graduates and gives back to society what was given, plus a whole lot more. And I don't quite get this argument: "Would George Washington Carver have come up with his inventions in horticulture if someone had “bribed him?” asked one critic. Would Marie Curie have been inspired to spend long hours in the lab?" Why WOULDN'T they? If they were motivated by the love of what they were doing, why would offering them money for it have been a negative thing? And the last question also makes no sense to me: "What kind of message do we give unmotivated kids...when we give them something they never earned?” If "unmotivated" kids are motivated to get good grades for cash, I think they earned it!

  Reply

  • June 21, 2009 by J-Rain

    I don't know why people jump on critics before doing research or knowing the problem. I was born and raised in Africa where a big number of kids are raised by both parents which makes it possible for both parents being responsible for their kid’s upbringing. However, here in US especially in black communities the number of single parents is continuing to raise streets gangs, killings, and young age pregnancies among teenagers. First you need to ask you self where the fathers? The answer to this is that most fathers in jails or their out there “sitting on their butts” not even aware their kid exists. But if the government or some other community organizations decides to pay these kids for better grades, to my understanding, I think it’s better for these kids to spend more time at school making money ( at the same time learning) than spending time in bedrooms having sex and smoking weed. The choice is very clear. Do you prefer spending time in school while getting paid or spending time on streets getting spoiled and finally get killed? Whether " paying for good grades" is considered bribing or not, it’s much better than being arrest on streets for drug or gun possessions and sentenced to life in prison.

    Reply

    • July 18, 2009 by S. A. White

      J-Rain: are you seriously suggesting that children have only two choices: "spend more time at school making money, spend time in school getting paid" or "having sex and smoking weed", "spend time on streets getting spoiled and killed" and "arrested on streets for drug or gun possession and sentenced to life in prison"? I don't know anywhere in the world where those are the only choices we have. Just because children are being raised by single parents doesn't mean they have no options. If they have one person who cares what happens to them, they can be saved from the degradation you described. If you don't have anyone who cares for you, why not join a service club, an athletic club or church and make some friends who'll help steer you in a more productive lifestyle?

• May 7, 2008 by Kina Barnum

  Finally someone who looks at statistics instead of listening to anecdotal blurbs. Thank-you B. Ruble and your name sounds familiar...

  Reply

• May 11, 2008 by Pam

  Bottom line,children go to school to learn. I never was paid by my parents or teachers for making the grades. And the same went for my kids.It was expected.

  Reply

  • May 19, 2010 by B

    Good grades are expected but there is more to this than just paying kids for grades, it also teaches them responsibility and the value of hard work. Some schools have co-op programs that pay students too. These programs provide valuable work experience which is so necessary in today's age. Most employers want to see that kids or prospective new hires have a strong work ethic. How can they show this if this ethic is not developed or monopolized on. I think schools that provide this opportunity are on the right track to create a good work ethic and powerful leaders as well .

    Reply

• May 12, 2008 by Kina Barnum

  hmm...well I think paying children to get good grades depends on a couple of things: the child's personality, also the parents communication/teaching their children how to responsibly think about this program. This is what I mean, you do not want your child to pick up on negative habits about money. If a child doesn't care at all about working hard for their grades well paying them may not be the best motivator for them to learn about "self-discipline", or the "respect of money". I also believe you would need an aware parent to guide the child along in teaching the concept of hard work and discipline. And that instant gratification is not always a good thing for the mind and soul. I am an ADD adult. I'vd had it since I was kid, and teenager. I got poor grades, but in no means was I an dumb person and I knew that. So, someone like me, in the past, trying to get paid for my grades, would have been disappointing since it appeals to higher grades. Why not reward "families" for working to have their kids go to school. I'm not saying in monetary means. To me I can see a lot parents not teaching the right idea about this program since we seem to be in a culture of instant gratification and greed. But to some, I'm sure there is a lesson and respectful understanding of self that will benefit the ones who REALLY understand.

  Reply

• May 13, 2008 by Denton

  The idea of paying kids to do well in school seems rather pointless to me. Certainly, it can boost test scores and attendance records, but what do those mean in the long run? If the goal of education is learning for its own sake, this is pretty clearly counterproductive. If the goal of education is preparation for college/jobs, it doesn't seem to do much anyway. If a child is interested, from a young age or not, in science or math or literature, she will put her own effort into studying that subject. As an adult she will work to obtain and succeed at a job she enjoys. Payment may be appreciated, but is in no way necessary to "make" her try at something she enjoys. If a child is not particularly fascinated by a school subject, she won't work particularly hard. If she's paid, that may function as a short-term motivator, and cause her to perform better by the school's standards, but it won't make a difference for her own interest. She'll go to college or not, but not be interested in a subject or career enough to devote the effort needed to succeed. The odds are that such a person will end up working at one of the numerous filler jobs--things nobody especially enjoys doing, but people work at because they need to earn money. Paying such a child to attend or succeed at school only reinforces the idea from a young age--work isn't something you enjoy or really try at, it's something you do so you can get paid. Certainly it's nice to get free money, especially if it *is* well-earned, but if it doesn't help the students learn, what is its purpose? The answer is simple: school funding. Much of school funding is dependent on the test scores and performance of the students who attend those schools. Paying students to do better, especially if much of the funds come from private sources, can actually be cost-effective for the schools. But while this may be an effective way of solving the school's problems, it doesn't do much for the students. If the schools have extra money, it should be spent on improving facilities, teaching materials, or teacher salaries--whatever makes the learning experience more effective and interesting for the students. While school funding is definitely a problem, the problem comes from the system that punishes struggling schools, and rather than bribing students, we should just fix the system. It may sound harsh, but making school into a boring job doesn't seem like an effective method of education to me.

  Reply

• May 17, 2008 by Diane McElroy

  Students should have to work for their grades without compensation. Compensation comes later through working and getting good grades and accomplishing our goals and dreams.

  Reply

  • February 11, 2010 by hunter riley

    kids should get paid

    Reply

• May 17, 2008 by cynthia sanchez

  I think it's a good idea. I finished high school in 2004 and I wish they had paid me because I most likely would have gone every day. It's hard for teens and nowadays kids from 12 and younger than 12 sometimes have kids and its hard for them to go to school, work and take care of the baby so they have to leave school. I know a lot of girls who wish they could have finished but couldn't because they had a family to raise. With a program like this... a lot of teen moms and dads would love this program and a lot of teens that are on their own would, too. Also I had a lot of friends who where 15 and 16 living on their own and selling drugs for extra money while working a legal job, if going to school paid they would not take the risk of going to jail to pay for rent or a bill. People nowadays need to realize that a lot of teens and younger kids are taking the role of adults and extra money for doing something we know we need to do is beautiful. I'm a 21yr old mother of 3 and I love it. I have my own house and I'm doing good but if school paid while I was there I might be doing better. So I think this is a good idea because schools bribe all the time, just with different things. In my high school if you had bad grades or bad attendance you couldn't go to the next school dance, thats a bribe, be here and do good and you can go to the dance. I even had a teacher that we had after lunch and if we got there early he would ask us to do his lunch dishes for an extra 5-10 points on are grade. I think I was there everyday to do dishes and I hate doing dishes. So bribes are going on anyway, why not make the bribe money?

  Reply

• May 21, 2008 by juan mendez

  I think it’s unfair to condemn schools for trying. Schools are severely under funded and if the goal is to get more funding, where’s the evil? With better funding, schools can create a better learning environment. In the long run this will help more students. I think everyone agrees that these programs have the potential to help some students, obviously not all of them. That would be unrealistic but even if it helped a few, is it not worth it? For those who do it for the money, they will realize that money is not free rather worked for. And yes, sometimes in lousy ways. The point is schools can’t depend on the 'system' to help them so they have created funding for themselves. If, in the process, they can motivate students to do better, then go for it. I think it’s a better idea than vending machines that promote obesity and poor health.

  Reply

• May 31, 2008 by Swej Lanigan

  Many kids can't participate in after-school programs or projects because they have to work to help support their families. This sounds like a way to bridge the gap between earnings and school - to show kids that their education is valuable and important, and to keep them in school where they should be, rather than working an evening job at McDonalds.

  Reply

Tell us what you think.