Students' expressed evaluations of incentives used to promote learning may not agree with teachers' choices.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
EdwardsA. L.Techniques of attitude scale construction.New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1957.
2.
EubanksJ. L.Differential incentive effects under varying instruction conditions (Interim Report, Air Force Contract No. F41609-75-C0028). Tempe, Arizona: Arizona State University, 1976. (NTIS No. AD-A028 477/8GI).
3.
FraseL. T.PatrickE.SchumerH.Effect of question position and frequency upon learning from text under different levels of incentive. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1970, 61, 52–56.
4.
KellerF. S.“Goodbye, teacher…”Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1968, 1, 79–89.
5.
KellerF. S.Ten years of personalized instruction. Teaching of Psychology, 1974, 1, 4–9.
6.
LipeD.JungS.Manipulating incentives to enhance school learning. Review of Educational Research, 1971, 41, 249–280.
7.
SullivanH. J.BakerR. L.SchutzR. E.Effects of intrinsic reinforcement contingencies on learner performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1967, 58, 165–169.
8.
SullivanH. J.SchutzR. E.BakerR. L.Effects of systematic variations in reinforcement contingencies on learner performance. American Educational Research Journal, 1971, 8, 135–142.
9.
WolkS.Du CetteJ.Monetary incentive effects upon incidental learning during an instructional task. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974, 66, 90–95.
