“Why do I have to go to school?!” Kids will complain and argue that school does nothing for them, nothing happens and they don’t get awarded! So rewarding kids with money will make kids want to attend school. If schools want students to be motivated and to start working hard, paying them for their hard work will. Receiving money causes kids to be persuaded to go to class. Paying kids will level the playing field. It could gain the kids’ attention, and it could be a teachable moment for kids to learn about money and working hard. Giving kids’ cash will make them improve in school.
To begin with, kids should earn money so they can be excited to go to class. There is an author called Ginger Ninja. Ginger Ninja wrote an article about paying kids. In their article, they state “Receiving money causes kids to be more motivated to come to class.” Kids will higher their grades because they’ve been in class enough to learn more. They can finally do well in tests and homework. To sum up, paying kids is a good idea, seeing giving kids money will encourage them to go to school and do well in it.
…show more content…
There is an author who also made an article about whether or not to pay kids. The article is on Prarieecothrifter.com. In the article, the author states “Paying kids can be an effective incentive, as long as you’re using it as a teachable moment.” Kids will learn how to use and work with money. It will help them if they ever get a job or if they wanted to buy something. In any case, it’s a great idea to pay kids because money could teach kids many
Students brought up in a system of incentives get accustomed working for grades. So yes. It works for many students to motivate work. But if "working" means learning, these external incentives teach the students the wrong thing to aim at, the wrong reason for doing it, and often the wrong way to do it. If we are hoping our students will be life-long learners, why would they continue learn in the grade-less post-graduation world? (Schwartz, 2011)
In conclusion, I think student-athletes should get paid for racking up revenue for their universities, the amount of time they spend in their sports, and by paying student-athletes, it may increase their motivation to reach academic success and steering them clear from unsolicited activities. The efforts of student-athletes must be acknowledged because they have given their best effort and countless hours of their time to represent their universities in the best way
No, it is not fair to pay teens less than adults. I think this because based on what Marilyn Watkins states, “Teens often need jobs as much as any other workers. Many have to work to help support their families. Others live on their own or are trying to save money for college” (Watkins 23). Many teens such as me are independent and have to pay a lot for their expenses. Teens including myself need money just as any other adult would and if the job requires the same amount of training as the adult, there is no reason the same amount of pay should not be distributed to the teens as the adults. Another example that would support my opinion of no is, “If they’re performing the same tasks as a 20-year-old, they should earn the same amount of money” (Watkins 23).
The use of incentives are debatable whether or not they should be used or not, however it is proven that in some cases it does work. With teenagers if a teacher says that we will get a grade boost by donating money, or time it it PROVEN (word choice) that we will feel more obligated to participate knowing that it will in some way benefit us. As much as we are being selfish and only thinking about how the outcome will benefit us, we still are committing a good deed. And should’t it just be about what the outcome is rather what gets you to the outcome. In the long run, you still end up helping and being kind even though you are doing it only because of the incentive. An incentive is defined as a th...
In my experiences as a student athlete, I can vouch for those in favor of paying student athletes. Because I need more money to help me through college, I had to apply for financial aid and eventually received a grant. There are many additional expenses I have encountered in just my first semester as a student athlete. An estimate of how much money I spend each semester is around 100 dollars. These expenses range from shampoo to eating out when the cafeteria is closed. The amount of time I spend as an athlete each week takes up at least 20 hours. The combination of time spent for basketball and personal needs demonstrates why student athletes should receive money. I’m amazed at how many things require money from my own pocket. The bottom line is student athletes need to start getting paid even if it’s minimal.
In the article “Pay to Play: should college athletes be paid?” the article states, “College athletes should not be forgot their main purpose at school is to learn and study, not receive money” (Birkenes and Akash). One can take from this that athletes should not be paid because they are normal students. College athletes are not making playing sports their only purpose for attending college; they are attending to pursue a more concrete degree that offers financial stability. Birkenes and Akash also write, “Paying college athletes would take money away from college budgets…” If athletes were to be payed then college would lose academic opportunities. The payment of athletes would cause academic cuts for things; such as math and science research. Payment of college athletes will cause a decline in college academics and cause the players to focus less on being a
According to PBS News Hour, even if students receive their rewards, there are moments where their parents take the reward away from them, which would leave them with disappointment. Additionally, let’s say a student put all their hard work for an assignment to get the reward (money) but to find out, they only got a ‘C’ as their grade. The effect of this can simply decrease their motivation for school and leave them in despair. To sum it up, if students were to get paid for grades, it will then again, leave them with frustration for not getting the desired grades or rewards.
I believe that giving out money to students and teachers that do well in the end of level testing is an inspirational idea. It will help the students stay motivated and they will want to learn in order to achieve the goal. It will also give teachers the motivation to instruct us better and help all the children learn equally. Now leading up to my essay I hope you will understand how well this could help the students and teachers throughout the world.
discussing the issue of if kids should get paid for doing chores or not. So do you think that kids
Building a financial literacy for your children is important. Giving them an allowance will help you do that. An allowance will give kids a chance to experience dealing with money before it becomes a crucial thing for them to know. The more practice and time they have dealing with money, the easier it will be for them to handle it as they get older. It will also give them more time to learn and perfect budgeting skills. Giving your child this skill early in life can help prevent complications when they are on their own. It is important to learn early on that you must work hard for the things you want. Your parents won't always be there to help you out.
In conclusion, students should be paid to do well in school because it has many benefits to the student. Those benefits include motivation to get good grades, the money would help the student financially, and the student would learn how to manage their money more effectively. School is a big part of every person’s life, so it should be more rewarding to the
When children reach a certain age, they like to have their own spending money. While they sometimes receive money for birthdays and other holidays, some parents pay their children for doing work around the home. While this benefits the child in an effort to have their own money, there are many pros and cons of giving kids an allowance for chores.
Introduction: I would let kids have money if they worked for it so they could buy something and would have to work more to get more money and then save up all their money for college so they could get a good education because i want a good job and earn some money.
First of all, students’ shouldn’t be paid money for good grades because pressure is put upon the student. According to the NEA, “...leads to practical problems in the classroom, including pressure….” Some students would even compare themselves with their fellow classmates. They can also feel vulnerable about themselves. How are parents going to feel if their child is in this circumstance! This situation can cause students to drop out. Clearly, students shouldn’t be paid, or they might feel tension.
Lynn Olson argues that there have been studies that suggest “school-to-work can help address one of the greatest problems in education: motivation.” This makes sense and I believe this to be a very accurate and significant argument. Without motivation students will find it very difficult to get things started and to complete their tasks. This not only happens with academics but in life general. Lynn Olson argues, “A majority of American teenagers in national surveys describe their education as “boring.” I can attest to that. Both in high school, and in college I have had to learn about subjects that I can careless about and because of this the motivation factor was extremely low. “Although they think it’s important to graduate, they don’t think that doing well in school matters.” I tend to agree with this. I believe that graduation is the key factor, and this is the reason why kids go to school. School-to-work programs can alleviate some of the boredom that studying out of textbooks can have.