Lessons from Piano Lessons:  Musings on Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivators

Posted in DemEd in Real LifePhilosophy of Education on Mar 10, 2010 - 11:17 AM

I am going to deviate this month in my blog from my usual teacher perspective and instead discuss things from a student perspective. Why? Because I have recently been inhabiting the role of a student and it is making me re-examine some assumptions I have had about motivation to learn; specifically - are extrinsic motivators wholly bad (as somewhat suggested by Alfie Kohn in his book Punished By Rewards)?

I have always wanted to play the piano - especially after seeing the movie The Piano (don't get me started on Harvey Keitel - hubba hubba, rrrrhrahwrrr). I finally told my spouse that for a holiday gift I would like piano lessons. So, he bought me ten lessons with a local teacher. I just had my seventh lesson last Thursday and I am loving them! After each lesson, my brain is going "ZING!" and I am excited to tackle the challenges of each new piece that has been assigned. And the challenges are significant. For example, this past week I have been struggling with Beethoven's Ode to Joy (a very simple version/arrangement of this piece). But I persevere and I have seen significant progress in just a few days.

I am surprised in many ways by these lessons. Surprise number one is that I persevere through the obstacles. In all my past educational endeavors, most academic things came fairly easily and if they did not, I tended to avoid them (e.g. avoiding advanced science courses). I am not saying that I never worked hard or never had to employ self-discipline, but usually when I did this hard work I was always chasing a carrot of some sort - a degree, a certification, etc. Whatever carrot it was provided me with the rationale for doing the work required, because I knew I would be rewarded at the end with something that could help me get future opportunities, etc.

But with piano lessons, there is no evident carrot in front of me - e.g. learning to play won't get me a better job. I raised this subject with my graduate students the other day when we were talking about extrinsic versus intrinsic motivators. We have been deconstructing how our conventional education system is so fixated on points, GPAs, etc. -- all forms of extrinsic motivators. I stated how liberating it is to be involved with piano lessons because I am not driven by an external reward. But one of my students asked, "Why, then, are you learning piano? Isn't there some piece of music you want to learn to play to impress others?"

Hmmmmmm - that really got me thinking! I do want to learn the "Linus and Lucy" song and some things from The Piano partly because I love the sound of them, but I must admit there's something in me that also wants to learn them to "show off" - to seek the approbation of others! So, this is surprise number two - a realization that perhaps extrinsic and intrinsic motivators are not mutually exclusive (what would Alfie Kohn say about this?).

There was an episode of Friends some years back in which Phoebe tried unsuccessfully to prove that there is such a thing as a selfless act. She was frustrated to learn that even when doing great things for others, with no evident reward to herself, she, in fact, got rewarded with good feelings. Am I, somewhat similarly to Phoebe, learning that there is no such thing as learning something just for the sake of learning? Don't we all seek out knowledge for some useful purpose? Granted, some knowledge is more immediately and tangibly useful than other knowledge (e.g. learning to change the oil in a car versus learning about the history of conscientious objectors in wartime), but it is all ultimately useful in some way.

Can we thus conclude that intrinsic motivations can never truly be separated from extrinsic rewards? That what begins as intrinsic ultimately intersects with extrinsic? Does it work both ways, though? Do extrinsic motivators always lead to intrinsic rewards? I think not. For example, as a child, I memorized facts for a test (seeking the extrinsic reward of a good grade), but I don't recall frequently feeling intrinsically satisfied with having done this; rather, I was just happy with the grade.

What does this tell us about education, then? I think it says that extrinsic rewards/motivators are not a pure punishment/evil, but they can be if they are the primary focus. If we could let learners pursue what intrinsically interests them, then the extrinsic rewards would follow. But people fear that without externally imposed discipline/sticks and carrots to begin with that kids would never learn the "important stuff." Would learning piano, if it had been my first interest to pursue as a child, have led me to reading and math - those supposedly "most important" of subjects? Perhaps? Perhaps I would have wanted to learn more about the composers whose pieces I was playing, and learning to read so I could read their biographies would have become my next intrinsic interest.

I will never know if an original intrinsic interest would have led me to the "important" subjects because I cannot go back in time, but it sure makes me wonder. And I also wonder if I hadn't had a conventional education with its emphasis on rewards and external approval if I would even have my existing interest in learning "Linus and Lucy" so as to get approval from others (i.e. did my early education experiences awaken the beast of always seeking external recognition?).

If extrinsic motivators are not the primary focus for learning from one's earliest age, do they then play less and less of an important role as one progresses through life? Again, unless I invent a time machine, I will never know, but it is an intriguing bit of food for thought (at least, I'M intrinsically intrigued by this question! - aren't you?).

Tags for this entry:
grades, achievement, motivation, alfie kohn, rewards, performance

Comment using your Facebook account: