Paid to learn

The following article comes from the Austin American-Statesman and is about Eastside Memorial High School (formerly Johnston HS) paying students to go to tutoring. The program, called the Tutoring Incentive Program, is funded with money raised privately, and the money students earn will be taxed. While this is an attempt at an incentive to get students to stay in school and finish their degree, I don't think it will work as they are anticipating.

First of all, if these kids were truly motivated to pass, they would not need a cash incentive to go to tutoring. Those who want to do well will make an attempt, money or no money. Those who just don’t care won’t make that attempt, and I don’t think money will persuade them--simple as that. So why? Maybe we should focus on why these kids aren’t passing or going to class. Focus on making the classes and teachers engaging. Make the kids want to go; to value the importance. Focus on getting parents involved, because they are a huge influence on their children. If the parent doesn’t care, why should their child?

By the time a kid reaches high school, their values and routine is basically already set. They have it in their mind whether or not they will attend class and try to do well. Maybe we should put more concentration on students before they get to the high school level; make them see the value of getting their high school diploma and not focus on standardized tests (a different issue best saved for another day).

Okay, so the incentive is supposed to be for those students that maybe don’t go to school for other reasons--taking a full-time job to help out the family, teen pregnancy, or just loss of interest. In addition to still attending school, going to tutoring is supposed to be like their “job” to earn some income and still continue with school. Will students really be earning enough at six dollars an hour for a few hours a week to help support themselves or their family, as opposed to working at a fast food restaurant full-time? Because there is no way they can be doing 40-hours per week tutoring as an “occupation” in addition to classes. And if they are, well, I’ve got 4 years’ experience…

The wages don’t even guarantee a difference in the student’s attitude--what if the tutors don’t help or are not engaging? What if the student really just does not care and is only going for the money? If they’re going to pay students, why not pay those doing well and perhaps the better one does, the more they earn? But really, what happened to the days of the diploma being the reward for good grades?