This section is deeply influenced by the work of American parenting and education critic, thought leader, and author Alfie Kohn[1].
From a Naturalistic Humanist perspective children are naturally curious, creative and inclined to share[2], presently however, the way our children are parented and taught is strongly influenced by a misanthropic view and the dominator model. We assume that children are naturally uncooperative and in need of continuous extrinsic motivation.
When using extrinsic motivation a parent or educator may utilize punishments (often euphemized as consequences) or rewards. Both are about controlling someone to achieve compliance rather than them acting from intrinsic motivation — acting to achieve a goal because they consider it to be interesting or enjoyable in and of itself.
The more we reward or punish a child to perform the less interest they will have in task. Our key concern should not be if our children are motivated, but whether or not their motivation is intrinsic.
In most families and schools, children are coerced into complying with our demands but this manipulative approach fails to support the characteristics that parents say they value the most.
Among the top character traits that parents say they want for their children are curiosity, creativity, empathy, and sociability. Rather than encouraging these traits, evidence indicates that rewards and punishments actually sabotage the qualities we say we want.
• Sabotaging Empathy – A child whose sharing gets re-enforced by rewards becomes less likely to share than a child who has not been rewarded. The reward shifts the emphasis away from the pleasure of sharing to the desire for compensation. Punishing a child who fails to share has a similar effect, increasing the child’s focus on themselves.
Rewards or punishments can coerce children into sharing but does not result in them becoming kinder and less self-involved.
• Sabotaging Sociability – Competitive grading disrupts social dynamics creating a stratified learning environment where students understand that they have a stake in their classmates doing academically worse. It is a system that creates adversaries rather than friendships.
Adversaries are created in sports, as well as academics with many aspects of extracurricular life presented as contests including talent shows, choral events, and science fairs.
• Sabotaging Curiosity and Creativity- Teaching to the test makes test grades seem more important than curiosity and creative thinking. Instead of children feeling free to invest their time and energy where their curiosity leads them they learn that what is most important is getting the highest score.
In some cases the reward that a parent withholds might be their love and affection. Not only is this a poor way to motivate, it also has tragic impact.
A proanthropic view of children recognizes that children are naturally curious, social, and inclined to share, however these natural inclinations are highly contingent on numerous factors.
For ittttexample, consider the claim that children are naturally inclined to share. Research suggests that this is correct, however, the degree of sharing depends on the age of the child, the portion involved, and if a request to share has been made. Such nuances notwithstanding, generally children are inclined to share without threat of punishment or lure of reward.
A child’s natural curiosity is also overlooked by a majority of our educational institutions. Grades, high stakes exams, test preparation, and routine homework assignments following an intense workday in school are all reflections of our attitudes about children’s lack of natural desire to learn, grow and gain proficiency. We fear that if given massive amounts of free time children would be idyll or involved in an activity that could be harmful to themselves or others, but this is a highly cynical view
Today more than ever before children have a world of knowledge at their fingertips. The time has come that we re-envision schools entirely. We should let children decide what they want to learn and when. Parents, teachers, and AI can act as tour guides to help support each student on their educational journey. If a child needs access to knowledge that requires bringing in another educator or parent we should do so as soon as an in-real-life, or virtual meeting can be arranged. School facilities can be utilized to promote much needed socialization and fun.
Free schools like Summerhill in England and the Albany Free School in New York are already based on a child directed learning model and have had decades of success.
Alfie Kohn sums up the key to motivating our children in a healthy and beneficial manner which he calls the 3Cs:
Content: We should be thoughtful and reasonable about what we ask kids to do. Rather than deploying manipulative techniques to modify the child’s behavior, rethink the request or its timing. Don’t give vacuous tasks like worksheets – don’t potty train too early.
Idleness, indifference, and irresponsibility are healthy responses to absurd work. – American Psychologist Fredrick Hertzberg
Collaboration: Refers to the quality of our relationship to our children and the relationship we encourage between children. In a collaborative parenting or educational environment, rather than “doing to” a child, the focus is to “work with” the child.
Choice: We should promote children having a say over their lives and a sense of autonomy.
Where the 3Cs are present manipulative behavior control methods are unnecessary.
As humankind faces the perils of accelerating technological change with lagging social progress the world that our children will have to contend with requires that they be as fully self-actualized as possible. Parents and educators will best support our children’s fullest development by letting go of misanthropic presumptions and manipulative tactics, instead treating them with the love and respect they deserve.
[1] Kohn’s articles, books, and other media presentations can be found at his website alfiekohn.org.
[2] See article Do Kids Have a Fundamental Sense of Fairness? at https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/observations/do-kids-have-a-fundamental-sense-of-fairness/